At the start of the book, various definitions of Modemism are discussed, among them the most widespread one in Iceland, that Modernist verse is free verse, or prose poems or in some other way non-traditional. This view is rejected, as these forms of verse are quite current from the 18th century onwards, and such verse is not fundamentally different from traditional verse as regards language, imagery and other characteristics. On the other hand, Modemist verse is often in traditional metre. Furthermore, the very widespread view that Modernist works, prose and verse, are distinguished by a particular outlook is rejected, i.e. that they express the feeling of being isolated in a world without meaning and where God is dead. This outlook may very well be far more prevalent during the last hundred years than before, and therefore it may be considered likely that it is one of the sources of Modernism. But that is different from saying that it is a distinctive feature of that literary current; we must not confound cause and effect. And in fact, this outlook can be found in works of different kinds and from different periods. 

Furthermore, it is often difficult to establish the meaning of Modernist works, for stating ideas is quite contrary to their essence. For their main characteristic is non-rational discourse, therefore they often appear chaotic, at any rate as a simultaneous experience of different things; not as an orderly sequence, following a logical order. Therefore we also must distinguish "compact poetry" from Modernism, tightly organized as the former is around one central image or idea. The difference between Modernist prose and verse is merely one of degree, corresponding to the fundamental difference between prose and verse in general. In both cases widely disparate elements are juxtaposed in one work. In prose works these elements are mostly whole chapters, long or short. In poetry these elements are smaller. It seems convenient to distinguish Expressionist poetry, where the disparate elements are at least whole sentences, from Surrealist poetry where there are often wholly disparate elements within one sentence. Of course this is a generalization, my own, as far as I know. However, this does seem to distinguish the poems of leading Surrealists such as Andre Breton, Louis Aragon and Paul Eluard from some other members of their movement, as well as firom the best-known Expressionists.

Often enough, definitions of Modernism have been mixed enumerations of a number of ideas, forms and modes of expression. But this makes for definitions so elastic as to fit almost anything. Therefore, classification of a work as being Modernist or not becomes very subjective, as experience has amply proven. To avoid such confusion, the classification must be based on purely literary criteria. In this I follow such internationally acclaimed authorities as Hugo Friedrich and Bradbury & McFarlane.

The poems of Halldór Laxness on the other hand have sudden changes of style, and contradictions, as well as incoherencies between individual lines from as early as 1922. In this he seems to be influenced by German Expressionists. In 1926-7 he wrote 5-6 poems and cycles of poems where the words within a single sentence are quite incompatible, or there are other such clashes between parts of a poem as to render it incomprehensible. The reader is caught in a mesh of impressions and surmises. Here Halldór is obviously influenced by surrealism, as he himself pointed out.

There are similar disparities of subject matter and style in Halldór Laxness' third novel, Vefarinn mikli fra Kasmir (The Great Weaver from Kashmir) written in 1925. Furthermore there is such "unassimilated" material as non-translated clauses in little-known languages, references to obscure works of art, etc. But the novel as a whole is ordered in a logical sequence; in the main according to traditions of novel-writing (reminding of Aldous Huxleys novels for example). The contrast of styles is between different chapters as in Bréf til Láru. But a clash of different styles is characteristic of the whole text in Laxness' following novels, published during the thirties. This is mainly a clash between the narrator on the one hand, and the characters on the other. The characters are mostly constructed according to novel-traditions, each characterized by his particular habits of speech and behaviour. However, they are as a rule greatly exaggerated, caricaturised. Contrary to the current novel-tradition, the narrator is omnipresent, commenting and passing judgement in the language and in spirit of a cultivated man of the world, utterly different from the novels' characters. Again, this is reminiscent of expressionism, and these clashes of style seem to be a follow-on from Laxness' poems of the twenties. 

In this respect, Laxness' novels of the thirties and later are Modernist, and far more so than Vefarinn mikli fra Kasmir. In the main, however, they too follow a logical sequence of events. So do the short stories of Halldór Stefansson, but during the early thirties these depart from the dominant traditions in some ways. Ultrashort, broken sentences remind one of the impressionism of the turn of the century. More characteristic, however, are differences of style between narrator and characters, similar to the stylistic dichotomy we saw in Laxness' novels. The intrusive narrator we are concerned with here is common to all the Modernist prose works under discussion. In opposition to the "realist" convention of hidden narrator, he is also to be contrasted with the old-time intrusive narrator, who most often was a kind of faceless representative of common values and opinions. The Modernist narrator, on the other hand, is far removed from conventionality, both in terms of style as well as in outlook, equally distant from both the reader and the characters portrayed.

Modernism reappears in Iceland only in 1944 with a few short poems by Steinn Steinarr (1908-1958). More appeared during the following years, and finally some 14 were gathered in his cycle Timinn og vatniO (Time and the water) in 1948, augmented to 21 in 1956, a few remaining unpublished. They are full of images and surrealistic like the above-mentioned poems by Halldor Laxness, although no directinfluence can be seen therefrom. To my mind an obvious model is mannen utan vag aby the Swedish poet Erik Lindegren (published in 1942. Incompatible elements are joined within a single word or within a sentence. Therefore these poems are incomprehensible, but associations of ideas and the elevated style give an impression of a strange, static world, in other words, a strange new image of the readers' world.

The so-called "atomic poets" met much hostility in the late forties, when they took up free verse, which now suddenly seemed unfamiliar to many readers, although several examples are to be found all the way into the thirties. But in fact there is very little modernism in the works of the "Atomic poets", except in the cycles of Hannes Sigfússon: Dymbilvaka in 1949, Imbrudagar in 1951 and Sprek i eldinn in 1961. He is the most prolific of Modernist poets in Iceland. All his poems are more or less traditional in rythm, alliteration and rhyme, so the reader naturally struggles to understand them as coventional poetry. Here, there is little of the above-mentioned surrealist contradictions, the discontinuity being between individual lines or verses, combined with great disparity in style. This recalls the methods employed in Laxness' expressionist poems, although slightly more radically. Again, however, no literary influences are to be seen, not even from Steinn Steinarr. Both obviously are to some extent influenced by T.S. Eliots' Waste land, especially Hannes. 

Poets writing after Steinn Steinarr and Hannes Sigfusson are not prolific as Modernists. The most unusual is Jónas Svafár who first published in the middle of the century and makes use of ambiguities in common expressions, in a way that explodes rational comprehension.Matthías Johannessens cycle Hólmgönguljóð (1956) is of the same kind as Hannes´and Eliots above-mentioned works, very disparate, albeit logically coherent.

At the same time, just before the mid-century, the first works of Thor Vilhjalmsson appear. These are poems and very short prose-sketches. Some of these have the above-mentioned characteristics of expressionist prose: far-fetched similes, short, broken sentences and a diction dominated by images. The characters are nameless and archetypal, and the sketches are difficult to understand. Indeed, logical comprehension often seems to be deliberately excluded, by endless explanations, later by long chains of far-fetched images in similes, going in divergent directions. Both of these kinds of "explanations" stop the action. Images usually dominate the text, so it falls into a series of "snap-shots." Sometimes they are mostly a stream of consciousness, as in a few short stories by Jón Óskar (1952) and Geir Kristjánsson (1956). 

However, the first Modernist novel in Icelandic was ástarsaga (A Love Story) by SteinarSigurjónsson in 1958. Its elements are in accordance with the novel-tradition, with characteristic turns of speech for each person. But there are sudden transitions from one person's stream of consciousness to another's, and plot is of little importance. In this way, the novel gives a sort of total image of common people's (mental) life, somewhat like the famous Tómas Jónsson metsölubok (T.J., a bestseller) by Guðbergur Bergsson in 1966. There, logical plot disappears altogether, but the narrator' s stream of consciousness -and of babble- gives a sombre picture of his milieu, yet a very colourful one, ranging from pessimism to caricature. The characters are more archetypal than Steinar's, in a degree similar to Thor Vilhjalmsson's, but more caricatural in general, somwhat like Halldór Laxness' and Halldór Stefánsson's in the thirties.
From 1968 onwards, Thor Vilhjálmsson publishes a series of novels which make Modernism a major force in Icelandic literature. They can be likened to his short prose works, but these novels are also very varied, especially in style. The nameless protagonist moves between literary genres from one chapter to another. The chapters can hardly be said to follow any plot, but are connected by an obsessive repetition of dramatic images in constant change.

V
During the sixties there is some surrealism in the poems of Jóhann Hjálmarsson and Baldur Óskarsson, and a little in the poems by Megas in the beginning of the seventies. Svava Jakobsdóttir then wrote some short stories and a novel in a cold, clinical style describing impossible things happening in everyday life of women. This results in a kind of parable-like form, that shows this everyday life as absurd. But in these parables everything can be understood in a logical manner, even if paraphrased, so they can hardly be called Modernist, rather allegories. From the mid-seventies onwards Pétur Gunnarsson published a very popular tetralogy of novels, Punktur, punktur, komma strik, etc, which, while following a logical sequence of events, has the same expressionist characteristics that we saw in Halldór Laxness' novels. A few other prose writers might be mentioned, and above all, Thor Vilhjálmsson continued his Modernist novel-writing, but during the seventies a new kind of Socialist realism dominated the nove-scene, and Modernism disappeared from Icelandic verse. It was replaced by so-called "open poetry," which describes every-day events in every-day language. Only their conciseness justifies calling these texts poetry. There were so few writers involved in Modernism in Iceland, that they were sensible to the currents of fashion, that had similar effects in other Scandinavian countries. However, during the eighties, there was a renaissance of Modernist poetry in Iceland, notably by the surrealist Medúsa-group and by the brothers Gyrðir Elíasson and Sigurlaugur Elíasson. These poets are of course different from one another, but in the main their poetry is characterized by chaotic sequences of imagery, and unreal descriptions, united only by associations of thought, and especially by a sentiment such as lust or terror, that dominates each poem.
We see that expressionism is the dominating tendency in Icelandic Modernism, in verse as in prose. Surrealism is quite prominent, and of course, various writers cannot be classified under either of these sub-currents, neither the first (Jóhann Sigurjónsson, Jón Thoroddsen; Jónas Svafár from the mid-century, nor some of the latest: Gyrðir and Sigurlaugur Ehíasson). It is striking how seldom any continuity or influence can be traced between these writers They mostly seem to write each in his own manner, building on what they have learned from foreign writers. It is only from the seventies onwards that there can be any talk of a domestic tradition in this sphere But that is just like the literary currents of the nineteenth century, in romanticism, in the short-story form and novel writing. Icelandic literature is first and foremost part of world literature, what autonomous, domestic interdependence there may be is only secondary.