Synopsis:~
Seattle Debutant Sofi Andersson will do everything in her power to protect her sister who is suffering from shock over their father’s death. Charles, the family busy-body, threatens to lock Trina in a sanatorium—a whitewashed term for an insane asylum—so Sofi will rescue her little sister, even if it means running away to the Cascade Mountains with only the new gardener Neil Macpherson to protect them. But in a cabin high in the Cascades, Sofi begins to recognize that the handsome immigrant from Ireland harbors secrets of his own. Can she trust this man whose gentle manner brings such peace to her traumatized sister and such tumult to her own emotions? And can Neil, the gardener continue to hide from Sofi that he is really Dr. Neil Galloway, a man wanted for murder by the British police? Only an act of faith and love will bridge the distance that separates lies from truth and safety.
My take:~
Sofi’s Bridge is an excellent novel from the talented pen of Christine Lindsay, whose British Raj series garnered stellar reviews. Adept in any historical era, Christine transports readers to 1913 America in this romantic story of unexpected love, dangerous secrets, and the plight of educated women living in a world catering towards men. Neil’s compassionate heart makes him easy to love and Sofi’s determination to protect her sister from an asylum, along with her talent as an engineer defies her socialite status and energises the story. Interesting facts about bridge-building and what we now call workplace safety, pepper the story naturally, and the growth of the characters make this story a must read for historical romance lovers. On a side note, I love the model on the cover chosen for Neil, who couldn’t look more Irish if he tried – again the attention to detail makes Sofi’s Bridge a most pleasurable reading experience.
With thanks to the author for my review copy
Relz Reviewz Extras
Reviews of Veiled at Midnight, Shadowed in Silk & Captured by Moonlight
Visit Christine’s website and blog
Buy at Amazon: Sofi’s Bridge
May 20, 2016 at 12:49 am
Probably would have to be Redeeming Love or anything by Francine Rivers!
May 20, 2016 at 12:52 am
Oops! This was meant for the other post ☺️
May 20, 2016 at 12:54 am
Hmmm… Tough question. The way our society looks has changed so much in the past couple of generations alone, so it’s hard to imagine what it would be like to live in the early 1900s. If I was transported from the 21sr century to that time period I would definitely have a hard time embracing it!
May 20, 2016 at 2:11 am
I would love to say that I would have embraced the role of women then, counting it all joy, just as I should embrace our Biblical role even today. Unfortunately, my flesh struggles with what I ought to do sometimes, so I’m not sure what my real reaction would have been. Nonetheless, I’m very excited about this giveaway. Thank you!!
May 20, 2016 at 2:28 am
I would have embraced motherhood and homemaking, but chafed at the politics and limits set on women.
May 20, 2016 at 3:41 am
Well, if we’re being honest, I 100% would have caused ruckus 🙂
May 20, 2016 at 5:28 am
Thank you all for those neat comments. It’s hard for us to imagine the restrictions on women back then, but from what I’ve read the average woman lived with it though perhaps didn’t like it at times. Only the very rare woman stood up against it. But this is also the era of the suffragette. Interesting times.
May 20, 2016 at 12:28 pm
I think a bit of both for me.
May 20, 2016 at 5:39 pm
I’m a bit feisty, but I also like a healthy balance. What began as a positive movement for women’s rights, also thrust feminism into the spotlight. I’m afraid some might not agree, but I believe that the rise of feminism also caused a negative view of what Christians would call Godly leadership within the family.
May 20, 2016 at 8:40 pm
I’m a rule follower, so I probably would enbracce it. Yet I have a bit of rebel in me at times, so I would not make a spectacle but hope to voice some concerns from time to time.
May 21, 2016 at 2:18 am
I love reading books from this era, but I would have had a hard time adapting to their time. That is…unless I was born then!
May 21, 2016 at 2:26 am
Chafed on everything would not have done good in the early 20th century.
May 21, 2016 at 9:11 am
If I was a woman in the early 1900s, I would have wanted to be treated the same as anyone else, including men. Same rights. I would have embraced the opportunity to be educated as completely as any man.
May 24, 2016 at 8:31 pm
Chafed. Seriously. I’m a true 21st century woman, who’s currently writing a school paper about limitations of women in politics. ‘Nuff said.