Television and Imaginative Intelligence

One person watching TV is not like the other.

TV shows consider ranges in standard IQ and emotional IQ when creating a show. But imaginative IQ is rarely noted—and it should be. Truth is, when it comes to TV we’re not viewing equally; imaginative ability has a massive (but generally unrecognized) impact on the success of visual storytelling.

The ability to imagine is deeply undervalued. Years ago my friends and I adopted the term “Imagination IQ”: an innate ability to experience entertainment as a form of reality.

(I’ve seen IIQ on the web recently, and am unsure if our interpretation lines up with the official definition? So this might be a different take on imaginative intelligence. The goal of this post is just to look at the impact of imagination on television and audience connection.)

In theory, watching television should take little imaginative effort. Unlike reading a book, TV doesn’t require internally visualizing the characters. But for those with low imaginative intelligence, transitioning to (a form of) belief in the onscreen reality/world still proves difficult.

First IIQ tell: attitude to visual metaphors.

Someone with a high IIQ experiences the story without identifying characters or worlds as metaphors. A vampire is a vampire; a werewolf is a werewolf, and so on.

To the less imaginative the “unnatural” character is hard to imagine as a form of “real” unless viewed through the filter of metaphors. Thereby vampires and werewolves become metaphorical takes on human sexuality.

Bypassing parameters of known reality is referred to as suspension of disbelief: the act of putting aside logic.

But naturally imaginative viewers don’t need to “put aside” the everyday world. What’s onscreen becomes a reality in the moment. There is no innate battle to override the current real-world framework: the world of the story is instantaneously real.

Likewise, the success of a production’s world building can hinge on imaginative intelligence, and it can be argued lower IIQ viewers call for heavier exposition.

An imaginative person often goes with the flow, letting the new “real” world unfold. A viewer who has low IIQ can’t handle gaps in knowledge from the outset because they can’t maintain the world in their mind: the base of the structure is missing, and soon collapses.

This idea links to the general disdain for genre television. In an interesting quirk, people will high IQ often have low imaginative intelligence. An experience that makes a person feel uncomfortable or lacking in some way, will usually be rejected—especially if said person is socially conditioned to feel superior.

“It’s not logical” is a common criticism of genre TV, and a leaning toward logic is a common trait in those with high IQs. But regardless of IQ levels, the imaginative can place logic in the back seat during the process of creative visualization.

Those with a high IIQ are prone to becoming avid fans because their television viewing experience is immersive, and accepting, from the outset. Those with a low IIQ will require a world closer to their current reality or a format highly explanatory/exposition-heavy from the outset, to compensate for a limited imagining skillset.

In summary, IQ, EIQ, and IIQ need to be considered when creating scripted TV material. This is part of why many brilliant, innovative programs become lost in the TV ether: there are too many ways for people to not “get” it—and not want to admit why...