I think the fundamental question that you’re asking is much deeper than aesthetics, though. It comes down to the way language and thought are embedded in each other. If you’ll forgive me, I find it easier to work in my own example, that of a poem, written in two languages, beautiful to two different readers, each who can only comprehend one of the languages.

When we say that the poem is beautiful, we mean one or both of two things:

1) The thoughts that this poem expresses are beautiful.
2) The manner in which this poem expresses these thoughts is beautiful.

To the extent that the beauty in a poem rests in the first idea, the beauty itself is really independent of the poem, and so the beauty is not subjective. Nonetheless, any logical structure that could be mapped onto the poem could partake in this beauty (I can expand on this later if it becomes relevant). But the situations in which it would be reasonable to say “This poem is beautiful” as shorthand for “The thoughts that this poem expresses are beautiful” are limited to that subset of logical structures – i.e. languages – for which there currently exist interpreters – i.e. readers – capable of translating the language to the thoughts.

To the extent that the beauty in a poem rests in the second idea, I think it is much the same thing, but in an even more complicated way. Thus I’ll skip over the explanation for now to give you – and the readers – a chance to react… I’ve got lots more to say stored up, though!

The fourth is about being a mom…