I'm also only about a quarter through, but so far it's interesting for non-economists. Some tolerance of technical explanations and simple formulas (i.e. not panicking at greek symbols) is required, but nothing unusual for the HN crowd.

This book has generated a lot of discussion, and so I went into it with my controversy-goggles strapped on. This is absolutely not required, as the book (based on what the author says he will cover and has covered so far, anyways) is more of a history and description of capital than political narrative or policy-making.

I agree that the tone of the first chapters is rather neutral and objective or at least not as controversial as expected. I think the author's recommendations which by definition are subjective are to be found in the last chapter which I have not read yet.