"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder"... or is it?
By saying it is, we say beauty is only a subjective quality.
But by saying it isn't – by saying that something may be beautiful without our being able to appreciate it as beautiful – we divorce ourselves from our experience and our association between words and description...
Is it possible to say
"It's beautiful, but I don't like it."
Which I think I may have said, from time to time. In that I can see elements and aspects which, maybe I know, are considered beautiful, or perhaps I can see an underlying elegance and purpose, but aesthetically I find it displeasing... Some of Rembrant's paintings would fall in to this category.
The thing is, am I just susceptible to the cultural conditioning of my upbringing in saying something like this? I have preconceived notions of what is beautiful and what isn't? But then, my aesthetic sense is also formed (to a large degree) by the same...
So there's a whole philosophic field based around these very questions.
But I guess I'm kind of wondering... how variable language is. How our thoughts are modified by the language and words we use, and yet the language and words we use are modified and morphed by our thoughts.
So often, everything seems so vague, so fuzzy, so indefinable, so inexplicable, so possibly variable, so uncertain and indefinate, and so futile. *sigh*