C. E. McGill's Our Hideous Progeny is shortlisted for the 2024 Wilbur Smith Adventure Writing Prize. 

Mary is the great-niece of Victor Frankenstein. She knows her great uncle disappeared in mysterious circumstances in the Arctic but she doesn't know why or how...

The 1850s is a time of discovery and London is ablaze with the latest scientific theories and debates, especially when a spectacular new exhibition of dinosaur sculptures opens at the Crystal Palace. Mary, with a sharp mind and a sharper tongue, is keen to make her name in this world of science, alongside her geologist husband Henry, but without wealth and connections, their options are limited.

But when Mary discovers some old family papers that allude to the shocking truth behind her great-uncle's past, she thinks she may have found the key to securing their future... 

Their quest takes them to the wilds of Scotland, to Henry's intriguing but reclusive sister Maisie, and to a deadly chase with a rival who is out to steal their secret...

About the Author: C.E. McGill was born in Scotland and raised in North Carolina. They are a recent graduate of NC State University. C.E. McGill's short fiction has appeared in Fantasy Magazine and Strange Constellations, and they are a two-time finalist for the Dell Magazines Award for Undergraduate Excellence in Science Fiction and Fantasy Writing. They now live back in Scotland.

WNSF: Congratulations on being shortlisted for the Best Published Novel award! What does adventure writing mean to you? Would you have considered yourself an adventure writer before being shortlisted for the Prize?

Charlie: To me, an adventure story is one that takes its characters (and its readers!) on a journey – something that shakes up the routine of ordinary life, exposing what each character is truly made of by setting them against obstacles both unexpected and strange. I was pleasantly surprised to learn that Our Hideous Progeny had been shortlisted for the Prize, as it didn’t immediately strike me as an adventure novel, but the more I thought about it, the more sense it made; in a way, I suppose a great deal of historical fiction is, by its very nature, adventure fiction, in that it transports its readers to an unfamiliar and perilous place: the past.

In Our Hideous Progeny, Mary embarks on a journey that’s not only physical, but emotional, too, as she fights against the obstacles put in her way by the archaic and patriarchal institutions of Victorian science.

WNSF: Are there any particular books or authors which have made a lasting impact on you?

Charlie: Well, Frankenstein for one, ha! Growing up, sci-fi and fantasy stories were always my favourite, and I particularly enjoyed authors who managed to blend the lines between the two in interesting ways – like Neil Gaiman, Diane Duane, Terry Pratchett, and Octavia Butler. My first real introduction to gothic and historical fiction was Anne Rice’s Interview with the Vampire, which grabbed me by the throat and hasn’t let me go since. 

More recently, writers like Sarah Waters, Madeleine Miller, Susanna Clarke, and Erin Morgenstern are huge inspirations for me, in terms of sheer craft – and I dream of one day writing anything as strikingly compelling as Carmen Maria Machado’s shopping lists.

WNSF: Can you tell us about any adventurous experiences in your life? Have they influenced you as a writer or your writing?

Charlie: I’ve never been a particularly outdoorsy person (I’ve got what the Victorians would call ‘a weak constitution,’ and what modern doctors would call ‘a variety of symptoms not quite earth-shattering enough to constitute an actual diagnosis of chronic fatigue’), but I’ve still managed to experience adventure in other, more non-traditional ways. 

I was homeschooled throughout my teens, which allowed me a wild amount of academic freedom; set loose in the library, I devoured books about nuclear fusion, number theory, cosmology, cryptography, ancient Rome, Egyptian hieroglyphs, electromagnetism – anything and everything that stoked my curiosity. For a long time, I actually wanted to be an archaeologist, and for three years running I attended a summer camp where we helped real archaeologists excavate the remains of a 16th century Native American and Spanish settlement at Joara, in the North Carolina mountains.

At one point, sifting through the dirt, I spotted something that looked like broken glass – but which one of the supervising archaeologists identified as the base of a crystal-quartz arrowhead. Long ago, a skilled craftsperson painstakingly napped that arrowhead from stone, and used it to feed their community, until it broke and they threw it away; and I was the first person to lay eyes on it in hundreds of years. 

Getting to experience history in such a raw, hands-on way – not the big picture, kings-and-queens history of textbooks, but the small, heart-achingly human history that one finds in everyday objects – was life-changing.

I didn’t end up becoming an archaeologist, but my fascination with history, particularly the history of science and technology and ideas, has remained. And this fascination, I think, is the lifeblood that runs through all my stories, and that drives me to research and write the things I do; history is an adventure all of its own, and one I’ll never get tired exploring.

WNSF: The Librarians and Library Staff who read, reviewed and selected your book for the shortlist also wanted to ask some questions. One asked, 'When I first read Frankenstein I was disappointed that I didn't instantly love it like I had anticipated, so it was a relief almost to read in your author's note that you didn't like it one bit when you first read it! Do you think that not being in love with the source text was helpful when it came to writing Our Hideous Progeny? Did it make it easier to bring Frankenstein's spiritual sequel to life?

Charlie: Haha, a kindred soul! I believe that when it comes to any kind of derivative work (retellings, spin-offs, spiritual sequels, parodies, satire, fan-fiction, etc.), the most interesting kinds emerge when one has both love and – well, let’s just say, a few bones to pick – with the original text. After all, if you thought it was perfect, why touch it? But, on the other hand, if you hate it entirely, how can you hope to make anything truly enjoyable from spite alone?

There are so many aspects of Frankenstein which I love dearly: lines that rock me to my core, and themes that remain timeless and brilliant to this day. But there are also plenty of elements that frustrate and discomfit me, and it was these which I really wanted to examine in Our Hideous Progeny. I wouldn’t necessarily say that my disliking some parts made writing the novel easier – it was always going to be a daunting task! – but it was part and parcel of why I felt compelled to write it in the first place.

WNSF: Another asked: 'You blend historical fiction with elements of feminism, queerness, and gothic storytelling. What inspired you to reimagine Shelley's work in this manner, and how did you approach balancing homage to the original with your own creative vision?

Charlie: I came up with the initial idea for Our Hideous Progeny while I was at university; in one class I was taking on the development of science fiction as a genre and we were reading Frankenstein, and for another class on the history of 19th century science, I was writing a paper on Victorian paleoart. I was just eating lunch, musing how the dinosaur sculptures unveiled at the Crystal Palace in 1854 really brought the past ‘to life’ in the public eye for the first time, when the two things clicked together in my mind – and I wondered, if some descendant of Victor Frankenstein was alive during this period, wouldn’t they have a go at resurrecting the past in a far more literal fashion?

In terms of how I blended in the other elements, that’s a hard question to answer, as they really seemed like a natural part of the project from the beginning. Victorian imaginings of the ‘antediluvian past’ are already so deliciously Gothic; and I knew, as a queer writer and feminist who’s always felt terribly sympathetic towards Frankenstein’s creation (and monsters in general), that I wanted my main character, this descendant of Frankenstein, to be a queer woman. I felt that someone who already knows what it’s like to be judged from birth based on appearances, someone who’s already been othered by society and painted as monstrous, would have a very different perspective on science and creation and morality than Victor Frankenstein.

WNSF: One member of the panel asked: 'Mary Frankenstein's journey in Our Hideous Progeny is a compelling exploration of resilience and self-discovery amidst societal oppression. How did you approach developing her character arc, particularly in conveying her inner struggles and triumphs as she navigates the challenges of pursuing her passion for science in a male-dominated society?'

Charlie: Thank you! In large part, actually, much of Mary’s emotional arc in the book is inspired by my own experiences. I started out studying engineering, and stuck with it long after I realised it didn’t bring me any joy – because if I relented, if I relaxed, if I didn’t succeed as much as I possibly could by every traditional metric of success, then everyone would simply take my failure as proof that “Girls can’t handle engineering.” And there was the other thing: I was beginning to realise that I was not, in fact, a girl; and, in Trump’s America, in a field dominated overwhelmingly by cisgender, straight men, I felt utterly suffocated.

Eventually, after a full-blown quarter-life crisis, I switched the focus of my major and decided to be a writer, instead. When I wrote Our Hideous Progeny, I didn’t have an agent, or any publications to my name. I had no idea yet if I’d just ruined my life, and thrown away a promising career in engineering for nothing. So much of Mary’s journey – learning to follow her passions in her own way, rather than constantly chasing after external validation from a system which refuses to respect her; realising that the things she creates are worth something, even if no one else even knows they exist – was deeply personal, and entirely aspirational. I wasn’t there yet, when I wrote it. (I’m still not, on my bad days.) But I was telling myself the story I needed to hear. And, judging from the response I’ve gotten from readers, it’s a story that a lot of other people needed to hear, too, which means more to me than I can say.

WNSF: One of our panel wanted to know whether you had to do lots of research into the scientific processes in the book? How did you go about it?

Charlie: I did – though in my research, I was less concerned with what is or isn’t actually scientifically possible, and more interested in what a scientist of the 1850s might think was possible. I knew that if I was writing a book set in the same universe as Frankenstein, then this was already a universe operating on very different rules from our own; so I did my best to place myself in the shoes of a mid-nineteenth century scientist, and find out how someone from such a background would explain (and replicate) the events of Frankenstein. 

I read, among other things, a fascinating book by Henry Harris called Things Come to Life: Spontaneous Generation Revisited, as well as a variety of contemporary scientific papers with fabulous titles like A Review of the Doctrine of the Vital Principle and Hints towards the Formation of a more comprehensive Theory of Life. These kinds of sources gave me not only an idea of what kinds of terminology was in use at the time, but also the kinds of philosophy and scientific theories that would shape Mary and Henry’s approach. Many of these sources, in fact, ended up with cameos in the book.

WNSF: Finally, more than one wanted to know if you are already working on your next project? If so, we'd love to hear more about it!

Charlie: I am! My next book is actually (unusually, for me) not tangled up with scientific history, but is, like Our Hideous Progeny, another queer Victorian gothic – this time, with vampires. I mentioned already that I grew up steeped in fantasy, and was particularly affected by Anne Rice’s novels; my favourite kinds of vampires have always been the terrible old-money kind, all lace and velvet and goth androgyny, the kind of subtextual queerness that’s traditionally only allowed in villains. This next book is sort of Carmilla meets Interview with the Vampire meets A Dowry of Blood, a love letter to all that I love about the vampire genre – as well as, like Our Hideous Progeny, an opportunity to chew on the elements I decidedly don’t love, as well.

WNSF: We find that adventure often crosses into other genres, including crime and historical fiction. What kind of books do you like to read?

Charlie: I love a good fantasy or science fiction story – particularly one that really takes its time to flesh out the setting with thoughtful world-building and lush atmospheric description, so that I almost feel as though I’m journeying alongside the characters into a brand-new world. (Tamsyn Muir, P. Djèlí Clark, Arkady Martine, N. K. Jemisin, and Katherine Addison are some of my favourite authors for that.) 

And, as you might have guessed, I also love historical/historical-adjacent novels that put a twist on some real aspect of science or history, and run with it as far as it will go – like Leech by Hiron Ennes, The Second Sight of Zachary Cloudesley by Sean Lusk, and Things in Jars by Jess Kidd.

WNSF: What has been your toughest criticism as a writer? And your greatest compliment? 

Charlie: I try not to read reviews for the most part, as I don’t want readers feeling like I’m breathing down their necks – but of the negative reactions I have seen, I was surprised to find that most of them really don’t bother me that much. Most writers, I feel, eventually get a sense for their own strengths and weaknesses; every story I put out into the world has the parts I’m confident enough to say are 'Good', the parts I’m self-aware enough to say 'Could Be Better', and the parts that 'I Hope To God I Actually Managed To Pull Off' – and that last bit, I find, is where the tender spot lies. If a reviewer complains that Our HIdeous Progeny is “Woke, historically-inaccurate feminazi nonsense”? In short – LOL. “The beginning was slow, and there are too many semicolons”? Alright; that one’s fair. “Mary’s monologue during this climactic scene didn’t emotionally resonate with me”? Crushing!

As far as my greatest compliment – a reader once sent me a five-page (single-spaced!) essay on all their favourite moments and themes and literary allusions in Our Hideous Progeny, which I plan to have engraved in gold and buried with me like an Egyptian pharaoh. I’ve also been lucky enough to see a few pieces of fan art, which makes me cry messy, real-life tears every time. As someone with a long history in fandom spaces, I feel that fanworks are one of the highest forms of praise a creative work can hope to receive. To know that a complete stranger was so affected by your story that they felt inspired to create something new because of it – to spend hours of their only life on earth analysing and engaging with and enthusing about your work, and sharing that love with others – makes me happier than I can say.

WNSF: Thank you so much for answering our questions, and congratulations again on being shortlisted!