I think if Santayana had practiced theology instead of philosophy it would be better for him , theologians would give him a high wage , he is a metaphysician in the first place.
Santayana isn't taking an aesthetic situation at all , he is taking art from a psychological point of view not aesthetics, he made a Special Relativity theory in art as Einstein did in physics , there's no absolute beauty just relative ( to a moral observer in our situation ) if so then what we are doing here ?! why you wrote the book ?!
A theory of aesthetics based on morality , speaks of art in terms of Good
??!! This theory has nothing to do with art exactly as Santayana has nothing to do with philosophy.Then if beauty is pleasure as Santana thinks , I can say that a cup of wine is the highest form of art , nothing can give (to speak out of sexual relationships ) pleasure more than it .On the other hand a cup of wine is bad
thing (healthy speaking) , Evil
in Santayana's words and cannot be beautiful according to his moral theory because the beautiful is good and vise versa .
I don't know on what kind of logic this theory is based , Aristotelian maybe ?!!