The title quotation comes from my impassioned letter to The Press, answering Lesley Beaven, loyal wife of the late Christchurch architect Peter Beaven, arch-critic of Neil Dawson’s sculpture. I should have simply called it ‘Chalice’, which Dawson far prefers, as the ‘the’ would look arrogant. Its omission is moreover consistent with this highly idiosyncratic, ‘see-through’, outsized and stemless interpretation of the Holy Communion vessel. Yet so familiar is this landmark (imagine someone saying ‘Let’s meet by the Chalice’), that Dawson should relax. Nomenclature aside, 20 years after the unveiling, writing Chalice’s art history is overdue.
Minus the critical chatter of resource consent submissions, numerous letters to The Press and editorials, Chalice’s history would be relatively uncomplicated and uncontroversial but duller. With apologies to the historian Lord Macaulay, there was ’no…