Six Questions for Nels Challinor, Dale Hall and Marta Kepite, Editors, Great Ape

Great Ape publishes absurdist humour in fiction, creative non-fiction and poetry. “Write something funny. Anything that makes us laugh goes to the top of the accepted pile.” Read the complete guidelines here.

SQF: Why did you start this magazine?

GA: At Great Ape, we believe in only two things: Humans are the smartest organisms on Earth and humans are the stupidest organisms on Earth. The problem is that very few people recognize how deeply funny and absurd we are as a species. At Great Ape, we find humanity’s internal contradictions to be downright hilarious and believe that, if given the proper evidence, our readers will as well. Laughter is cathartic, and laughter at oneself is even more so. Our job is to assemble the evidence, to find the best pieces of absurdist poetry and prose so that our readers can remember how to laugh at themselves.


SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a submission and why?

GA:

• Humour, especially anything with an absurdist flavour. We want our readers to laugh so comedy is a must. The absurdist element may be light, but it should be present. We are more interested in publishing pieces that parody the ridiculousness of human existence, rather than the ridiculousness of the current political or economic climate. 

• Readability. In addition to correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation, we want our pieces to have a fluency that draws the reader in. It seems reductive to say that we want the writing we publish to be good writing, but that’s essentially what we’re looking for. Of course, the last two sentences in this paragraph both end with prepositions, so we understand that everyone makes mistakes. We just don’t want to see too many.

• Originality. Ironically, originality is probably the one trait that every editor prioritizes. We are interested in risk-takers, trouble-makers, and accomplished fakers. Send us something we have never seen before. 


SQF: What most often turns you off to a submission?

GA: Due to the focus of our journal, we end up receiving quite a few pieces written in an unconventional form or structure. While we are loath to tell people that they should not experiment, we will occasionally receive a piece that is difficult to read because of its structure, most often because it unsuccessfully attempts to copy the format of a different medium, television, for example. Even if the comedic/absurdist element is there, if the way that it is structured makes a piece difficult to read, chances are that we are not interested in publishing it.


SQF: What do you look for in the opening paragraph(s)/stanza(s) of a submission?

GA: Besides basic grammatical and syntactical coherence, it absolutely depends on the project of the piece. It’s a good sign if we can get a chuckle or two out of the first paragraph or stanza, but it is by no means necessary. The opening lines of a good humour story or poem will generally set up some kind of problem, one that either will or will not be solved (again, depending on the project) by the end of the piece. If this problem is inherently absurd, all the better, but some of the best pieces take a relatively banal problem and make it absurd.


SQF: Many editors list erotica, or sex for sex sake, as hard sells. What are hard sells for your publication?

GA: Stories and poems that conflate sex or violence with comedy are definitely hard sells. Of course, sex and violence are both themes that lend themselves to explorations of the absurd, but we are not interested in publishing writers who rely too heavily on either to the detriment of storytelling or poetic fluency. Other hard sells include comedy that hinges on poking fun at a group of people (especially a group to which the author does not belong) and anything titled “Thirteen Ways of Looking at _____”. Nothing wrong with taking the piss out of at yourself or humanity in general, our journal was basically founded on that premise, but taking the piss out of others can and often does approach racism, sexism, ableism, etc. The “Thirteen Ways…” thing is just laziness most of the time.


SQF: What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?

GA: What are some books, stories, or poems that potential submitters can use as inspiration or examples of the kind of work you are interested in publishing?

Absurdist humour is a tough concept to define, so it helps to provide examples. Samuel Beckett, Kurt Vonnegut Jr., and Douglas Adams are all masters of the style, as is Phoebe Waller-Bridge. Joseph Heller and Thomas Pynchon are particularly good at tackling the balance between absurdism and sex/violence. Writers like Haruki Murakami and Ralph Ellison borrow elements from absurdism, though neither puts much humour into their works. We define any work that satirizes humanity’s tendency to self-aggrandize as absurdist, so Lawrence Sterne and Voltaire, specifically Candide, are both good examples from the history books. For poetry, look to Bo Burnham, Jennifer Knox, and Lewis Carrol.

Thank you, Nels, Dale and Marta. We all appreciate your taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.