 At the beginning of the 20th century , Rudyard Kipling referred to lines 69 and 70 , alongside three lines from Samuel Taylor Coleridge 's Kubla Khan , when he claimed of poetry : " In all the millions permitted there are no more than five — five little lines — of which one can say , ' These are the magic . These are the vision . The rest is only Poetry . ' " In 1906 , Alexander Mackie argued : " The nightingale and the lark for long monopolised poetic idolatry--a privilege they enjoyed solely on account of their pre @-@ eminence as song birds . Keats 's Ode to a Nightingale and Shelley 's Ode to a Skylark are two of the glories of English literature ; but both were written by men who had no claim to special or exact knowledge of ornithology as such . " Sidney Colvin , in 1920 , argued , " Throughout this ode Keats ’ s genius is at its height . Imagination cannot be more rich and satisfying , felicity of phrase and cadence cannot be more absolute , than in the several contrasted stanzas calling for the draft of southern vintage [ … ] To praise the art of a passage like that in the fourth stanza [ … ] to praise or comment on a stroke of art like this is to throw doubt on the reader ’ s power to perceive it for himself . " 
 At the beginning of the 20th century , Rudyard Kipling referred to lines 69 and 70 , alongside three lines from Samuel Taylor Coleridge <a href='null_genetive' title='1'><mark>'s</mark></a>Kubla Khan , when he claimed of poetry : " In all the millions permitted <a href='dey_it' title='2'><mark>there</mark></a> are no more than five — five little lines — of which one can say , ' These are the magic . These <a href='drop_aux' title='3'><mark>are</mark></a>the vision . The rest <a href='drop_aux' title='4'><mark>is</mark></a>only Poetry . ' " In 1906 , Alexander Mackie argued : " The nightingale and the lark for long monopolised poetic idolatry--a privilege they enjoyed solely on account of their pre @-@ eminence as song birds . Keats <a href='null_genetive' title='5'><mark>'s</mark></a>Ode to a Nightingale and Shelley <a href='null_genetive' title='6'><mark>'s</mark></a>Ode to a Skylark <a href='drop_aux' title='7'><mark>are</mark></a>two of the glories of English literature ; but both <a href='uninflect' title='8'><mark>were</mark></a> written by men <a href='null_relcl' title='9'><mark>who</mark></a>had no claim to special or exact knowledge of ornithology as such . " Sidney Colvin , in 1920 , argued , " Throughout this ode Keats <a href='null_genetive' title='10'><mark>’</mark></a><a href='null_genetive' title='11'><mark>s</mark></a>genius is at its height . Imagination can<a href='negative_concord' title='12'><mark>not</mark></a><a href='negative_concord' title='13'><mark>be</mark></a> more rich and satisfying , felicity of phrase and cadence can<a href='negative_concord' title='14'><mark>not</mark></a><a href='negative_concord' title='15'><mark>be</mark></a> more absolute , than in the several contrasted stanzas calling for the draft of southern vintage [ … ] To praise the art of a passage like that in the fourth stanza [ … ] to praise or comment on a stroke of art like this is to throw doubt on the reader ’ <a href='null_genetive' title='16'><mark>s</mark></a>power to perceive it for himself . " 
At the beginning of da 20th century , Rudyard Kipling referred to lines 69 and 70 , alongside three lines from Samuel Taylor Coleridge  Kubla Khan , when he claimed of poetry : " In all the millions permitted it ain't no more than five — five little lines — of which one can say , ' These r tdamagic . These the vision . The rest only Poetry . ' " In 1906 , Alexander Mackie argued : " Thdaightingale and thedark for long monopolised poetic idolatry--a privilege they enjoyed solely on account of their pre @-@ eminence as song birds . Keats  Ode to a Nightingale and Shelley  Ode to a Skylark two of the daries of English literature ; but both was written by men had no claim to special or exact knowledge of ornithology as such . " Sidney Colvin , in 1920 , argued , " Throughout this ode Keats   genius is at its height . Imagination canain't more rich and satisfying , felicity of phrase and cadence canain't more absolute , than in the sdaral contrasted stanzas calling fa the drda of southern vintage [ … ] To praise the artda a passage like that in the fourth stanza [ … ] to praise or comment on a stroke of art like dis is to throw doubt on the reader ’  power to perceive it for hisself . "