Taken from:http://www.alpheratz.f2s.com/keatsian-ideas.htm

Negative Capability:

‘At once it struck me, what quality went to form a Man of Achievement, especially in literature, and 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 and reason.’ – Keats

‘being capable of eliminating one’s own personality, in order imaginatively to enter into that of another person, or, in extreme cases, an animal or an object.’
The phrase was coined by Keats in the very letter to his brothers, as quoted above.

The whole concept is a bit hazy, probably because his own identity is precarious, and he was continually being invaded by the identities of others. The person of fixed opinions, such as Wordsworth, enjoys/suffers from the ‘egotistic sublime’
In his letter to Bailey, Nov 1817, Keats affirmed that ‘Men of Genius’ do not have ‘any individuality’ or ‘determined character’

Another letter to Woodhouse Oct 1818 defines ‘the poetic Character’ as taking ‘as much delight in conceiving an Iago as an Imogen’ adding: ‘What shocks the virtuous philosopher delights the chameleon poet’

In another letter, Keats says that the ‘poetical character… has no self- it is everything and nothing- it has no character and enjoys light and shade; it lives in gusto, be it foul or fair, high or low, rich or poor, mean or elevated- it has as much delight in conceiving an Iago as an Imogen. What shocks the virtuous philosopher delights the camelion Poet… A Poet is the most unpoetical of anything in existence, because he has no identity, he is continually filling some other body‘ <— Edit: sry to disrupt the your flow of thought. But this sounds wrong.

Wow. What if you are uncertain about your uncertainties? To be able to hold two ideas that are antithetical without an impeaching sense of irritation requires a veritable mastery over one's need for certainty. Certainty is an illusion. Reality is always in flux. Obviously Hegel didn't have 'negative capability', as seen from his whole thesis, antithesis, synthesis worldview. Maybe.. the acceptance that two opposing ideologies can simultaneouly exist IS the synthesis. Hmm.

F Scott Fitzgerald: "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function." Maybe the bulk of my frustration stems from my need for an absolute truth regarding all situations. To every situation, I used to believe, there has to be a right decision, opinion, or direction to take. But maybe there isn't any and all are equally valid.

The problem with ppl like keats is that, sure, they are a rarity, but they possess no apparent value or social significance in today's pragmatic, utilitarian, and over-bureaucratized society. They perceive and perceive and can’t do anything relevant enough to increase society's awareness. The strength of poems as mediums of change has been subjected to the attrition of the empirical domination of the present times. Kinda reminds me of Siddartha's Samana phase like how he transfuses his soul into objects and animals. Hesse has 'negative capability'. I think that's why I gravitated towards Siddartha's character. He was unassuming.

I tend to approach all lit texts with this voracious hunger to scour every detail innit so as to unconver the teleological intention of the author. I guess that’s why I have a preference for Wordsworth’s poems, as opposed to Keats’. When I first read Keats’ poems in upper sec. I was like wtp? NOT exam-friendly. But then again, his purpose is to convey passion, and induce sensuous appeal in the reader. It elicits an aesthetic response to the text, rather than an intellectual one. Maybe one day I could be like him.

Oh.. who am I keating,
Vbec