In 1893, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle killed off Sherlock Holmes – a character he had been writing about with great success since 1887′s A STUDY IN SCARLET – in a story called “The Adventure of the Final Problem.” Conan Doyle reportedly felt that the Holmes stories were keeping him from accomplishing more important work, so his solution (ironically) was “The Final Problem.”

As it turned out, though, Conan Doyle had a problem beyond “The Final Problem”:  Namely, that Holmes wouldn’t stay dead.

Readers loved Holmes. So did Conan Doyle’s publishers. In other words, nobody wanted Sherlock Holmes dead except the man who’d created him.

So after eight years of pressure, Conan Doyle responded with 1901′s THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES, but set the story an unspecified number of years before the events of “The Final Problem.” That way, he could give his publishers and his public a little more Holmes, but still make sure that the arrogant old cokehead stayed dead.

In other words, Conan Doyle would control Holmes. Holmes wouldn’t control him.

Yeah. Right. Good luck with that, Art.

An alive-and-well Holmes reappeared in 1903′s “The Adventure of the Empty House,” a story set after the events of “The Final Problem” . . . and then Conan Doyle continued to write about Sherlock Holmes – prolifically – for another quarter century.

It’s generally thought that Conan Doyle resurrected Holmes for two simple reasons: Public demand, and the corresponding bags of money from his publishers.

But I suspect that, for Conan Doyle, it wasn’t that simple at all.

Oh, I’m sure he wanted the readers and the money. I’m real sure about that.

Nevertheless, I’d bet a blue carbuncle that a deeper, truer reason why Sir Arthur Conan Doyle began writing about Sherlock Holmes again was because he, Conan Doyle, just couldn’t stop thinking about the brainy sonofabitch he’d created. Regardless of what the public wanted, my guess is that Conan Doyle mainly couldn’t leave Holmes alone because Holmes wouldn’t leave him alone.

Probably thanks to Conan Doyle and Holmes, mystery and crime writers still tend to make their names (and sometimes their fortunes) on recurring characters. Even though they may write other things about other characters, they almost always keep coming back to their trademark P.I.’s, burglars, hit men, and forensic pathologists. They almost always keep coming back to their own Holmeses.

But science fiction and fantasy have spawned their fair share of recurring characters, too. There’s Harry Harrison’s Stainless Steel Rat; George R.R. Martin’s Haviland Tuf; and J.K. Rowling’s, uh, whatever that kid’s name is. To mention just a few.

Even mainstream fiction provides examples. There’s John Updike’s Rabbit Angstrom; Philip Roth’s Nathan Zuckerman; and Ernest Hemingway’s Nick Adams. Again, to mention just a few.

So I’ve been wondering:

Even when all you fiction writers out there choose not to return to a certain character on a regular basis . . . are there some of your creations who still won’t leave you alone?

Does Henry Lee from PETROGYPSIES play the oilpatch blues into Rory Harper’s ear while the Grey Lion sleeps? Does Davy from JUMPER teleport into Unca Stevie’s line of sight at inopportune moments at the dojo? Does Aina from SCARS send postcards to keep Caroline Spector up-to-date on whatever mischief the Horror’s been up to lately?

In other words, do any of you have an unkillable Holmes? Is there anyone from your published (or unpublished) work whom you’d like to chuck over Reichenbach Falls . . . if only that would do the trick?

Consider that a rhetorical question, if you like. I’m just musing here, since I really had nothing to post about this week.

Still. If you’ll tell me yours . . .

Well. We’ll see.

And now I really must go. I have a picnic-lunch date with a certain professor.

Moriarty, that is.