Although the letter in its entirety is too long to quote here, you’ll have to trust me when I say that only the last quarter of it puts his definition of negative capability into context. Here is that context:

Several things dovetailed in my mind, at once it struck me, what quality went to form a Man of Achievement especially in Literature which Shakespeare possessed so enormously—I mean Negative Capability, that is when man is capable of being in uncertainties, Mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. This pursued through Volumes would perhaps take us no further than this, that with a great poet the sense of Beauty overcomes every other consideration, or rather obliterates all consideration.

The last few months I have engaged a new poetic. I am composing miniature intimations - inferences? - of abstract expressionism.

I find my best opportunities in rusting metal, greasy alleys, and aging walls.  Where the intentional begins to descend into entropy, I find a beauty much more compelling than the original intent.

Where most see decay - and they are not wrong - I choose to see beauty.  As intention is pierced, an inner sanctum is opened and a paradox of perception is exposed.