Sarka's Reviews > The Russian Concubine

The Russian Concubine by Kate Furnivall
Rate this book
Clear rating

's review
Oct 08, 2011

it was amazing

This is actually Book two in a current trilogy that I am reading. Wow.... What I love about this story is that the author is not sugar coating anything. If blood is to be spilled, it is and big time. It opens your mind to the true Russian and Chinese history in the early part of the last century. The Bolshevik and Communist history. and in between it has the forbidden love stories first of the mother and then her daughter too. If you only read book 1 "The Jewel of St Petersberg" you will end up with a different ending to the full story and what you think happened doesn't really. It is a very clever way for the author to end one book in one way in case a reader only reads the one but if you choose to go the distance, you are shocked and cannot put the story down because you don't want to miss anything. The Author actually wrote book two and three first and then did a prequal to it but if you haven't read the story yet, I suggest you start with book 1. What an amazing trilogy.

1. The Jewel of St Petersberg - Jen's and Valentina's Story in Russia - The Parents
2. The Russian Concubine - Lydia's and Chang's Story China - The Daughter
3. The Concubine's Secret - Lydia's and Chang's Story Russia. Rescuing Dad
4 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read The Russian Concubine.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

Finished Reading
October 8, 2011 – Shelved

Comments (showing 1-3 of 3) (3 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Anne (new) - added it

Anne I liked the historical aspects of this novel too. I wasn't crazy about the romance - I think the author got carried away a little with the instantaneous connection between Lydia and Chang. Or maybe I'm just cynical!

message 2: by A. (new)

A. Does have the order of novels incorrect? Jewel is #1, Concubine is #2, etc.?

message 3: by A. (new)

A. Ok, just checked it. So Jewel is the prequel, correct?

back to top