Skip to comments.Museum glories in pair's gift
Posted on 03/09/2006 3:34:26 AM PST by Republicanprofessor
Museum glories in pair's gift By Kyle MacMillan Denver Post Fine Arts Critic
Vicki and Kent Logan of Vail have made a bequest of their extensive collection to the Denver Art Museum, along with their Vail home and gallery and endowments in the millions to support exhibitions, acquisitions and a curator. Among artists represented is Andy Warhol, whose work hangs behind them. (Special / Peter M. Fredin)
More than $30 million in contemporary artworks by such marquee names as Andy Warhol, Damien Hirst, Jeff Koons and Cindy Sherman. Fifteen million dollars in cash. A house and gallery in Vail.
With a bequest including all those ingredients, nationally known art collectors Kent and Vicki Logan are set to become the Denver Art Museum's largest donors ever, museum officials said Tuesday.
"It is the single biggest dose of jet-propulsion fuel that we have ever had," said Dianne Vanderlip, the museum's curator of modern and contemporary art.
Vanderlip called the bequest one of the two most significant developments in her department's history, rivaled only by the museum's $90.5 million addition, set to open this fall.
Kent Logan, who made his money in the rough-and-tumble world of investment banking, and his wife, Vicki, are relatively young - 62 and 59 respectively. But he said they were ready to make the bequest, a gift that becomes official upon their deaths.
"I'm sort of anal, so in terms of having your affairs in order, who knows in this day and age what can happen," he said.
The Logans have spent more than 14 years acquiring work from around the world, anticipating collecting trends and tapping new sources, including the booming Chinese market. They are included on ARTnews magazine's prestigious annual list of the world's top 200 art collectors.
They have been Colorado residents for just six years, retiring here from San Francisco. But the Logans have fallen in love with their adopted state and want to keep their collection here.
"We've always wanted to make a difference, and Vicki and I consider Colorado our home," Logan said.
In addition, he said, they believe Denver's visual-arts scene is primed for a "quantum improvement," especially with the opening of the museum's addition. They want to be part of the changes.
"In many ways this is the answer to the question: What's next? And so the timing is in connection with (continuing) the momentum, the build-up associated with the new building," he said.
The bequest includes $10 million for an endowment supporting exhibitions, acquisitions and the hiring of an additional curator for the modern and contemporary department. With such a fund, the museum preserves the principal and uses its annual interest to cover operating costs.
Perhaps more important, the Logans have bequeathed all the artworks in their collection not already promised to another institution - more than 225 in all - including any future acquisitions.
This is not the first time the Logans have shown their generosity to the museum. In 2003, they donated 213 artworks. That collection's estimated value is between $3 million and $5 million. Estimated worth of the latest donation is at least $30 million, bolstered by the presence of major works by such notable artists as Franz Ackermann, Katharina Fritsch, Takashi Murakami, Ed Ruscha and Sam Taylor-Wood. The first donation consisted mostly of 1990s works by emerging artists. But Vanderlip said this group offers a broader look at contemporary art and helps link that earlier gift to the museum's existing holdings.
"Many of the works he still has are not by emerging artists but by very established artists," she said. "This is a much more whole group of masterworks."
To round out the bequest, the couple plan to give the museum their house and accompanying private gallery - totaling 15,000 square feet - and a $5 million maintenance endowment. The buildings could be used as a conference facility or a small-scale regional art center.
If the property does not work out as a satellite of the art museum, the institution has the right to sell it five years after the couple's death and divert the proceeds and endowment to the contemporary department.
TEN KEY WORKS in the Logan bequest
Franz Ackermann, "B1 (Barbeque with the Duke)," 1999, above Katharina Fritsch, "Monch und Doktor (Monk and Doctor)," 1997-99 Damien Hirst, "Do You Know What I Like About You?" 1994 Ed Ruscha, "Burning Gas Station," 1965-66 Jeff Koons, "Two Balls Total Equilibrium Tank," 1985 Koons, "Fait d'Hiver (Made in Winter)," 1988 Cindy Sherman, "Untitled Film Still #55A," 1980 Takashi Murakami, "DOB in the Strange Forest," 1999 Murakami, "May Sathuki," 1988 Andy Warhol, "Brillo Box (soap pads)," 1968
Vicki and Kent Logan donated $10M along with their home and extensive art collection to the Denver Art Museum.
Ruscha with Burning Gas Station Jeff Koons an untitled film still by Sherman
I think we've seen enough of Hirst and Warhol not to need the pictures.
I can see why they need a place to put such huge pieces. I think this is a case of fashion collecting; better donate the works and get a good tax deduction before the world realizes how truly shallow and empty postmodernism is.
I know I'm a horrible snob. What do you all think?
Let Sam Cree, Woofie, or me know if you want on or off this art ping list.
Excellent. Its amazing where certain people leave their bequests. Nelson Rockefeller left all of his Latin American art collection to the San Antonio museum, Fulgencio Batista left his collection of Cuban art to the Daytona Beach museum, and John Ringling simply left his house in Sarasota as a museum to exhibit his collection of Titian and Reubens.
Snob or not, I agree with you.
I like Lichtenstein's work from the early sixties, but lately he seems to parodying himself and this later work (like most postmodern work) seems empty. Let me know if I'm wrong; give us a report!
I would like to meet Frank Stella. His work has changed so much through the years and his later work is really dynamic in person (but hard to imagine through 2d images on the internet).
I think leaving great collections to small musuems would be much more appreciated. The large museums might put the less great works in storage, whereas Small City Museum would put them on view and really appreciate them.
BTW, I hear there is a great David Smith retrospecive at the Guggenheim Museum in NYC, for those of you in NY. Go and let us know what you think!
I think I find myself in good company.
I think the mushrooms are perfect for a children's park...otherwise "shallow and silly" about covers it. What's the dreary point of the rats?
***... before the world realizes how truly shallow and empty postmodernism is.***
I'm SO glad you said that.
And that's not even that good.
Agreed. The stuff is kind of cute in a way, but that's hardly a big compliment for something that presents itself as "art." In my view, this is what happens when art schools throw aside the teaching of craftsmanship, tradition and the pursuit of timelessness, replacing it with a futile chase for originality and the cutting edge.
They get cuteness instead.
I know I'm a horrible snob. What do you all think?
I agree. You are a horrible snob. :^)
(and the postmodernism stuff is just expensive septic system fill)
Someone once said that modern (postmodern) art was one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated on the art world.
My daughter is a fan of Japanese anime' and has a number of cartoon posters and little figurines in her room that are almost identical to that assemblage in the last shot . . . but she bought the figurines for $3.95 each!
That work is an enormous rat sculpture, not really a photograph. Hard to tell on line these days.
Thanks for the ping.
And you may be a snob, but I don't get the point of those works.. except the B&W still. And even that one's sorta iffy.
The Murakami, I think, would look much better if it was a cell from an anime.. however, I'm assuming it's a bunch of statues. Seriously weird. And even if it was a cell, why would it be worth very much.. it's just a bunch of mushrooms!
Or maybe I'm too traditional in my art. Ah well, and I try so hard. :'( Lol.
Wow, where can *I* stuff three basketballs into a glass case and get celebrated as an "artiste" and get paid lots of money?
Actually, I think the one in the middle foreground is the Red M&M:
*snicker* Could be, could be.
Or Murakami-san was quite high on something quite illegal when he made those... Who knows? :^D
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.