Name: Our Hideous Progeny
Rating: 3.727272727272727 (11 reviews)
ISBN: 9780857529046

C. E. McGill

Our Hideous Progeny

i loved this but it could have been a bit gayer 

Thea Sophie

Ok, admittedly I was on a Frankenstein kick, but I liked this one A LOT. It’s weird… It’s gross… It’s got the right amount of pettiness to make it believable… I found it to be a really solid story about what might lead the granddaughter of Frankenstein to dabble in building some kind of hideous beast of her own, and how she could come to feel about it vs the men around her. Give it a spin if you, like myself, love a new twist on an old story. 

Apiecalypse Jen

palaeontology & monster making & feminism?!? oh my! 

aggressively in love with this book, it has everything i want in a gothic, monster story;

mary, a rightfully angry female character obsessed with palaeontology, in 1850’s london at the height of scientific discovery surrounded by mediocre white men.

her whiny husband henry, who ends up being the cause of most of the drama of the plot, and trying to blame it on mary every chance he gets.

maisie my beloved chronic illness girly, honestly a legend.

the creature, a plesiosaur, still to this day my favourite jurassic period marine reptile so i may have been bias to this whole story because of that.. 🖤

Cris

palaeontology & monster making & feminism?!? oh my! 

aggressively in love with this book, it has everything i want in a gothic, monster story;

mary, a rightfully angry female character obsessed with palaeontology, in 1850’s london at the height of scientific discovery surrounded by mediocre white men.

her whiny husband henry, who ends up being the cause of most of the drama of the plot, and trying to blame it on mary every chance he gets.

maisie my beloved chronic illness girly, honestly a legend.

the creature, a plesiosaur, still to this day my favourite jurassic period marine reptile so i may have been bias to this whole story because of that.. 🖤

very interesting, read very slow a la frankenstein and other lit of the time, but very good! I liked the style and the characters a lot

fris🐝

'Compelling and utterly absorbing ... an artfully crafted debut that echoes the dark essence of Mary Shelley's FRANKENSTEIN while maintaining a fascinating originality all of its own' Susan Stokes-Chapman, author of PANDORA 'A gripping Gothic tale of grief and ambition, passion and intrigue' Jess Kidd, author of THE NIGHT SHIP 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... _______ 'A wonderful book; dark, passionate, multi-layered' Joanne Harris, author of CHOCOLAT & THE STRAWBERRY THIEF 'Exquisitely written... a story worthy of Mary Shelley' Sean Lusk, author of THE SECOND SIGHT OF ZACHARY CLOUDESLEY 'Sumptuously gothic, this atmospheric debut left me reeling' C.J. COOKE, author of THE LIGHTHOUSE WITCHES '

A sumptuous gothic adventure story with echoes of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein

It feels disrespectful to bring up "Jurassic Park" (1993) but I am also surprised no one seems to have brought up "Jurassic Park" (1993) in the reviews. Have you guys seen "Jurassic Park" (1993)?

I felt like this was a creative spin on the classic "Frankenstein" story that was careful to not be a retelling of it while also asking how a different person (say, a paleontologist) would interpret Victor Frankestein's experiments and why they would even try to repeat them. It helped create the sense that Mary, as our protagonist, was her own person - which a lot of derivative works often fail to achieve - with struggles specific to herself, her gender and social status and her time. This makes the novel truly read like its own work. It was a smart decision.

On the downside is that the ethics of reviving animals do not hit quite in the same way as stitching together human bodies - or maybe it is just me. We have, fortunately or unfortunately, now had a lot of stories about unethical experimentation and/or experimentation in the name of money-making or fame on humans and animals - really, it has been an incredibly lasting theme since the publication of "Frankenstein" - with some of it being extremely goofy. So it is a little difficult to read the novel without taking this context into account, making some sections of it feel a little unserious.

Regardless, it is still an engaging read with a nicely put-together prose. The plot is constantly moving in a way that reminded me of the Guy Ritchie "Sherlock Holmes" movies (which I adore) - which is to say I could see this as an atmospheric and exciting feature film that I would eat up. I am not sure if that is what I expected.

It feels disrespectful to bring up "Jurassic Park" (1993) but I am also surprised no one seems to have brought up "Jurassic Park" (1993) in the reviews. Have you guys seen "Jurassic Park" (1993)?

I felt like this was a creative spin on the classic "Frankenstein" story that was careful to not be a retelling of it while also asking how a different person (say, a paleontologist) would interpret Victor Frankestein's experiments and why they would even try to repeat them. It helped create the sense that Mary, as our protagonist, was her own person - which a lot of derivative works often fail to achieve - with struggles specific to herself, her gender and social status and her time. This makes the novel truly read like its own work. It was a smart decision.

On the downside is that the ethics of reviving animals do not hit quite in the same way as stitching together human bodies - or maybe it is just me. We have, fortunately or unfortunately, now had a lot of stories about unethical experimentation and/or experimentation in the name of money-making or fame on humans and animals - really, it has been an incredibly lasting theme since the publication of "Frankenstein" - with some of it being extremely goofy. So it is a little difficult to read the novel without taking this context into account, making some sections of it feel a little unserious.

Regardless, it is still an engaging read with a nicely put-together prose. The plot is constantly moving in a way that reminded me of the Guy Ritchie "Sherlock Holmes" movies (which I adore) - which is to say I could see this as an atmospheric and exciting feature film that I would eat up. I am not sure if that is what I expected.

This was such an interesting take on Frankenstein, and I liked it a lot. McGill's writing was so atmospheric. I usually find more Gothic-leaning stories slow and drawn out, but that wasn't the case here. Admittedly, it takes a while for anything of substance to occur, but I never found myself bored. A lot of that has to do with Mary. I enjoyed her as a character. She was intelligent, driven, and focused. There was also a little romance between her and Maisie that I liked as well. If you're looking for an eerie read for the fall, I recommend checking it out.

Our Hideous Progeny

Reviews

Highlights