Most Famous Fictional Character

What do Benedict Cumberbatch, Robert Downey, Jr., and Basil Rathbone have in common? Tough question, don’t you agree? The following information may not make the answer any more apparent: Michael Caine, Peter O’Toole, and Charlton Heston (of all people) have all done the same thing. As have Leonard Nimoy, Larry Hagman, and George C. Scott.

Stumped? Here’s a hint: the fictional character most often portrayed is not, as I would have thought, Frankenstein. Nor is it Dracula. The monsters are in second and third place respectively. The winner, with more appearances in “film, television, stage, or radio” than even Frankenstein or Dracula, is Sherlock Holmes.

It is difficult to pinpoint the exact number of printed copies of the four novels and 56 short stories by Conan Doyle. A reasonable guess might be “more than Harry Potter, fewer than the Bible.”

Why the enduring popularity? The malevolent villains, the wealthy supplicants, the wry banter between Holmes and Watson all have their appeal. But the “aha moment” is especially seductive for me. All my neurons light up when Holmes explains how he solved the crime. “Yes, of course!” gives me pleasure. And then I go on: “I could have figured that out-if only I had devoted hours of uninterrupted study to learning all the different strains of tobacco sold around London.” “Of course,” I exclaim. “The mud on the murderer’s boots obviously came from Ipswitch! Anyone who dedicated endless time and attention to studying mud under a microscope would know that.”

You and I might not be lucky enough to have been bitten by a radioactive spider or born on Krypton but IF we committed our lives to studying tobacco, mud and the “agony” column of the London Times, we could solve singular crimes that would leave the heads of European countries expressing speechless thanks. Holmes was a man like you or I only more insightful and with more time on his hands. Holmes was successful not only because of superior intellect but also because of intense study. He made inferences based on knowledge painstakingly acquired.

Fast forward a century and a bit to a popular TV series. Like Holmes, the protagonist of “Limitless” is able to make connections, bring together disparate information, and solve complex crimes.

By taking a pill.

No study required. He remembers everything he’s ever seen, heard, or smelled based on digesting a clear pill.

Mind you, this essay is not my frequent screed about the disadvantages or tinkering with the brain chemistry of your minor child. Long term readers are familiar with how convinced this author is that psycho-stimulants and SSRIs are over-prescribed for young ones. My readers know my opinion on recreational abuse of prescription medications. My interest today focuses on heroes who don’t do the work, but get the grades anyway. Brian Finch doesn’t study mud, tobacco, or society pages. He just brings the information together chemically.

On “Shameless,” “Lip” cuts class, throws a chair through a window, and gets expelled from school but passes the AP exam because he “read the book a couple years ago.” Viewers see him drink beer; they don’t see him study.

In the real world where so many of our children actually reside, endless hours of study are required to achieve proficiency. Smart kids put in just as many hours to achieve mastery because they take harder courses.

Modeling sober attention to learning will benefit all children. Exposing them to television shows where characters with modest ability and less motivation solve crimes and excel on tests will not.

At what age should we read with our kids rather than allow them to devote their lives to screens? As Benedict Cumberbatch, Basil Rathbone, or Robert Downey, Jr. would agree: “Elementary!”