1. Mark Twain's Correspondence with Henry Huttleston Rogers , 125.

2. Mark Twain-Howells Letters , II, 698-99.

3. David B. Richards, in "Mesmerism in Die Jungfrau von Orleans," PMLA 91 (1976): 856-70, argues that contemporaneous notions of mesmerism, hypnotism, clairvoyance, and somnambulism shaped Friedrich Schiller's story of Johanna. Twain, who appears to have read Die Jungfrau , probably was especially attentive to mesmeric overtones in nineteenth-century versions of Joan of Arc. (See Gribben, Mark Twain's Library , II, 606.)

4. Mark Twain, "Two Speeches," New York Times , July 7, 1900, p. 461.

5. Brooks, The Melodramatic Imagination . David Grimsted's analysis of "the melodramatic structure" in nineteenth-century American plays foregrounds the importance of feminine virtue, purity, and "perfect goodness" in a way that illustrates Brooks's characterization; see Grimsted, "The Melodramatic Structure," in Melodrama Unveiled , 172-83.

6. Christina Zwarg argues, valuably, that Joan of Arc is about the way masculine history and storytelling—including both the "authorities" that the "translator" supposedly draws on and the romanticizing narration of de Conte—obscure and imprison Joan, despite (or with the help of) their ap-

peals to privileged "proofs" and "personal recollections." But in "the few moments in which Joan is permitted to speak her own words" this male history is subverted, its grammar deconstructed, and a ''feminist" Joan shines through. See Zwarg, "Woman as Force in Twain's Joan of Arc: The Unwordable Fascination," Criticism 27 (1985): 57-72. Zwarg obviously is registering the melodramatic structure of obscuring and unveiling, although in her effort to make Joan a saboteur of phallocentric discourse, she discounts too surely the sentimental womanhood that links Joan of Arc to nineteenthcentury melodrama.

7. Mark Twain, Personal Recollections of Joan of Arc (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1896), vii-viii.

8. On the nineteenth-century popularity of Joan of Arc, see Marina Warner, Joan of Arc: The Image of Female Heroism (New York: Knopf, 1981), particularly chap. 12. Also see Ann Bleigh Powers, "The Joan of Arc Vogue in America, 1894-1929," American Society Legion of Honor Magazine 49 (1978): 177-92; Albert E. Stone, Jr., The Innocent Eye: Childhood in Mark Twain's Imagination (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1970), 206; and Showalter, Sexual Anarchy , 29. Among the main stage versions of Joan's story was Schiller's Die Jungfrau von Orleans , first performed in Weimar in 1801, and performed in the United States throughout the century (see the listings for the play in Odell, Annals of the New York Stage ); John Brougham's The Lily of France (1840); George Henry Calvert's The Maid of Orleans (1873); and Jeanne D'Arc , by Jules Barbier, an English version of which—by William Young—was performed in New York in 1890 and 1891 (Odell, Annals of the New York Stage , XIV, 534, 575). Significantly, upon finishing Joan of Arc Twain turned quickly in 1896 to negotiations for its dramatization; though they were unsuccessful, a version of his Joan appeared on stage in 1926 to 1927, with his daughter Clara Clemens in the cast (see Mark Twain's Correspondence with Henry Huttleston Rogers , 221-22, 224, and Schirer, Mark Twain and the Theatre , 93). Pertinent for Twain's notions of femininity and performance, Adah Isaacs Menken played a version of Joan of Arc in New York, at least, in 1862—along with Mazeppa and The French Spy —just before taking her act out West, where Twain saw her and argued with his friends over her theatricality and expressiveness (Odell, Annals of the New York Stage , VII, 409).

9. Warner, Joan of Arc , 237, 260.

10. Jackson Lears, No Place of Grace: Antimodernism and the Transformation of American Culture 1880-1920 (New York: Pantheon, 1981). Throughout this book Lears attends to the pursuit of "authentic experience" and a recoil from rationalized and commodified American culture, but see, especially, chap. 4, "The Morning of Belief: Medieval Mentalities in a Modern World."

11. This is the argument made throughout Marjorie Garber's Vested Interests: Cross-Dressing and Cultural Anxiety (New York: Routledge, 1992), but see, for example, 16.

12. Twain operates, in effect, with the version of the "public sphere" whose history Jürgen Habermas has traced—a conception of public interac-

tion grounded in privacy, private property, autonomy, and the intimate sphere of the nuclear family, with its ideals of equality, openness, mutual respect. See Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society , trans. Thomas Burger and Frederick Lawrence (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1989), especially 27-29, 43-56. By denying the competition and economic interest endemic to this public sphere, and paradoxically constituting itself by excluding women, the conception posed the contradictions that Twain's obsession with sincerity and performance tried to grapple with. The urgency of this grappling became greater as the late nineteenth century brought fissures and erosions in the homosocial male public terrain.

13. Linda Williams's remarks in the first two chapters of Hard Core about the late-nineteenth-century melding of the will to truth and the male drive to expose the secrets of the female body are, again, highly pertinent. The larger relation between melodramatic unveilings of feminine virtue and scopophilic sexuality deserves further investigation. Catherine Clément, too, has made a number of connections among male displays of women that are relevant to Twain's Joan of Arc—e.g., the similarities between theater and the exhibition of female hysterics in the 1890s, between the hypnotized woman in Jean-Martin Charcot's lecture theater and scenes of public punishment, between the exposure of entranced women patients and the display of the delirium and the public burning of witches. See Clément, The Weary Sons of Freud , trans. Nicole Ball (New York: Verso, 1987), 51-59. And see Martha Noel Evans, Fits and Starts: A Genealogy of Hysteria in Modern France , on Charcot's amphitheater and theatrical performances of hysteria (21) and on the interplay of visibility, knowledge, desire, and gender in conceptions of hysteria (5).

14. On this nineteenth-century argument, see Warner, Joan of Arc , 246.

15. See, for example, Cox, Mark Twain: The Fate of Humor , 272-75; Cox puts irony, satire, showmanship, amorality, and bad-boy mischievousness on the side of Satan / 44, and seriousness, morality, ideality, and piety with Joan. Also see Stone, The Innocent Eye ; Stone objects to Joan of Arc 's having "been dismissed as an aberration," but nonetheless contrasts it to "the hopeless pessimism" of The Mysterious Stranger (204).

16. The Mysterious Stranger Manuscripts , ed. with intro, by William M. Gibson (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1969), 386.

17. For an account of Satan / 44 as a showman, see Sargent Bush, Jr., "The Showman as Hero in Mark Twain's Fiction," in American Humor: Essays Presented to John C. Gerber , ed. O. M. Brack, Jr. (Scottsdale, Ariz.: Arete Publications, 1977), 79-98.

18. Sherwood Cummings, in Mark Twain and Science: Adventures of a Mind (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1988), sees a fundamental dichotomy in Twain's later writings between human organisms as machines and human beings as spirits. John S. Tuckey also discusses a similar split in "Mark Twain's Later Dialogue: The 'Me' and the Machine," American Literature 41 (1970): 532-42; the oppositions Tuckey identifies—between a psy-

chology of humans as mechanisms and a psychology of the unconscious and dreams, between automatism and spirituality (533)—put the matter in terms which, in light of my research and argument, show the connections of the pairs as much as their differences.

19. The connection William M. Gibson, in an undeveloped aside, sees between the materializations of Colonel Sellers as a scientist and the materializations of these duplicates is an important insight; see his Introduction to The Mysterious Stranger Manuscripts , 10.

20. On the mesmerists' ideas that somnambulists had an enhanced "sixth sense," that the body could be touched in order to correct the flow of magnetic fluid, and that mesmerists, through touching or the projection of fluid, could throw patients into somnambulistic trances, see Darnton, Mesmerism and the End of the Enlightenment in France , e.g., 3, 128, 153; also Maria Tatar, Spellbound: Studies on Mesmerism and Literature (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1978), 13-15.

21. On the uncertainty in American phrenology between overt, atheistic materialism in explaining consciousness and religious attachment to ideas of spirit, see John D. Davies, Phrenology, Fad and Science: A Nineteenth-Century American Crusade (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1955), 156-57. Similar, enduring confusion in homeopathy and mesmerism over whether the "vital principle" pervading and animating the body is material or immaterial, physiological or spiritual, is discussed in Joseph F. Kett, The Formation of the American Medical Profession: The Role of Institutions, 1780-1860 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1968), 133-34, 141, 148.

22. R. Lawrence Moore recounts the tendency in spiritualism to speak of spirits, but to look to materialist science for conceptions of magnetic forces and imponderable fluids that could carry spirit communications; see Moore, "Spiritualism and Science," 474-500. Also see Owen, "The Other Voice: Women, Children, and Nineteenth-Century Spiritualism," 36.

23. Thomas Laycock, Mind and Brain (1860; rpt. New York: Arno Press, 1976), xv, 203, and Carpenter, Principles of Mental Physiology , xviii-xix, 2-3, 28, 691, 696-97, 701-2, 707-8. Also see L. S. Jacyna, "The Physiology of Mind, the Unity of Nature, and the Moral Order in Victorian Thought," British Journal for the History of Science 14 (1981): 109-32; Roger Smith, "The Human Significance of Biology: Carpenter, Darwin, and the vera causa ," in Nature and the Victorian Imagination , ed. U. C. Knoepflmacher and G. B. Tennyson (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1977), 218-23; and Danziger, "Mid-Nineteenth-Century British Psycho-Physiology," 127. Even Oliver Wendell Holmes, in Mechanism in Thought and Morals , while promoting conceptions of humans, and their brains, as automatic mechanisms, ultimately rejected reducing morality or moral choice to mechanism (82, 87) or "materializing'' human beings into "brute facts" (90).

24. Edmund Gurney, Frederic W. H. Myers, and Frank Podmore, Phantasms of the Living , 2 vols. (1886; rpt. Gainesville, Fla.: Scholars' Facsimiles and Reprints, 1970). On Twain's reading of this volume, see Gribben, Mark Twain's Library , I, 282.

25. On Myers, Phantasms of the Living , and Twain's relations with the Society for Psychical Research, see Gillman's Dark Twins , 136-80.

26. See Mary Baker Eddy, "Christian Science Versus Spiritualism," "Animal Magnetism Unmasked," and "Physiology,'' in Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures (Norwood, Mass.: Plimpton Press, 1934). Eddy, despite these attacks, and in a kind of uncertainty characteristic of nineteenthcentury health "science," continued to believe in mesmeric and spiritualist phenomena. See Gail Parker's interesting discussion of Eddy in "Mary Baker Eddy and Sentimental Womanhood," New England Quarterly 43 (1970): 3-24, especially 13-14.

27. The relation between Quimby and Eddy is told in Stefan Zweig, Mental Healers: Franz Anton Mesmer, Mary Baker Eddy, Sigmund Freud , trans. Eden Paul and Cedar Paul (New York: Viking, 1932), 119-32, 154, 163, 190. Also see Frank Podmore, Mesmerism and Christian Science: A Short History of Mental Healing (London: Methuen, 1909), 251-67, 285.

28. Quoted in Gillman, Dark Twins , 139.

29. Ibid., 47.

28. Quoted in Gillman, Dark Twins , 139.

29. Ibid., 47.

30. On Twain and the ideas of Charcot and his followers, also see Gibson, Introduction, The Mysterious Stranger Manuscripts , 27; Tuckey, "Mark Twain's Later Dialogue," 535; and John S. Tuckey, Mark Twain and Little Satan: The Writing of "The Mysterious Stranger" (West Lafayette, Ind.: Purdue University Studies, 1963), 26-28. All of these scholars focus on the pertinence of the French research into somnambulism for Twain's notion of the autonomous dream self. But the research of Charcot and Janet into hysteria is also instructive and important for understanding Twain's work because it moved from a decidedly physiological and neurological focus, in Charcot's investigations in the 1880s, to a declaration, in Janet's work of the 1890s, that hysteria (and manifestations of it such as mediumship, trance writing, hypnotic states, and somnambulism) was caused by the mind, as an automatic bodily response to unconscious "ideés fixes" and "suggestion." Janet argued that responses of patients to magnetism and electricity were the function of suggestion, not physics or physiology. He reviewed his research and general position in lectures given at Harvard University in 1906, published as The Major Symptoms of Hysteria (New York: Macmillan, 1920), xi-xxiii; see also, in these lectures, his history of the study of hysteria, with attention especially to the Salpêtrière and Nancy schools and the move from physiological to psychological explanations (1-21). This movement must provide the background for Twain's declaration, in reference to a cure for Susy, that hypnotism as practiced by "Charcot's pupils & disciples" is "the same thing" as "mind-cure" ( Mark Twain-Howells Letters , II, 659).