Federal Ban on Ivory Effective June 2014

There has been a lot of chatter in the news lately concerning the Obama administration cracking down on the import and export of ivory goods in the United States.  News organizations from NPR, the Washington Post and Forbes Magazine have all had numerous articles and editorials discussing the upcoming ban on Ivory and the implications it will have on various aspects of society.  These limits come with good reason in in terms of new goods being imported and sold considering that the elephant poaching in Africa has reached a critical point threatening the extinction of these magnificent animals.  However, these far reaching mandates will impact not only the private collector and antique dealers, but also musicians and museums. 

It is important to understand that simply possessing ivory you already own is not illegal, nor is passing it on to your heirs. Selling ivory, whether as a business, individual, or as part of an estate liquidation, is where things get tricky.

An editorial in The New York Times in February 2014 indicated that the ban prohibits “all commercial imports of African elephant ivory, including antiques.”  That means no African elephant ivory whatsoever, regardless of the age, can be brought into the United States.  The ban will also prohibit exports except for documented antiques.

In addition, said ivory cannot be sold across state lines unless the seller has documented proof that it is in excess of 100 years old, which has long been the benchmark for antiques to the U.S. Customs Service.  Within state lines, a seller must be able to demonstrate that an object was legally imported prior to 1990.  “The burden of proof of purchase will fall on the seller, and sales will require rigorous documentation,” stated The New York Times.

The new regulations make it near impossible to prove the age of a piece that is being offered for sale, according to experts. Will anything short of a bill of sale showing when the item was originally purchased be sufficient?  It is not clear at this point whether having an item authenticated and dated by a professional, even with written documentation, is going to be enough to pass the more rigorous selling requirements.

For now, keep any documentation you have showing that an item made of ivory was purchased before 1990 or dates it as more than 100 years old with the piece. This is not only for your reference should you decide to sell, but also that of your heirs later.  Dealers should also document objects made of bone, fossilized Wooly Mammoth ivory of North American origin, or any other substance that might be confused with ivory to the best of their ability so those items will not be confused with banned ivory and be confiscated from shops and shows.

The purpose of the expanded federal ban, clearly, is to drive down the demand for African elephant ivory by making trade illegal. This could, however, have the opposite effect by making ivory even more valuable on the black market. That remains to be seen. And, of course, dealers and collectors would only benefit from a rise in price for that reason if they were willing to delve into that seedy marketplace. Most won’t be willing to take the risk.

And then you have those who will rush to the marketplace and scoop up ivory items while they can still get them. This may actually cause a temporary rise in value. But the other reality antiques aficionados have to face is without a free market to allow the trade of collections of ivory, it could very negatively impact value in the long term. Even ivory that remains legal to sell in states other than California, that of Asian elephants and whales among others, may go down as people become reluctant to invest good sums in any type of ivory as they fear of further bans.

The artistry found in objects carved from ivory won’t diminish, however, no matter how rigorously the ban is enforced. These are still items you can enjoy owning while you have them, and then pass them along to your heirs or to a museum. One thing is for certain, they most definitely should not be confiscated and destroyed.

This is the Brain on Art

Maybe it’s just all in your head.  Art.  Beauty.  Why you like what you like may be in fact a biological function of your brain.  Semir Zeki, professor of neuroaesthetics (yes, it is a real thing) at University College London, was involved in one recent study to find out what brain functions are involved in the aesthetic experience.  In the study, people were placed in a brain scanner and shown various images while researchers recorded their brain’s reactions.  Researchers reviewed the scans to identify the works that each individual liked best, and they succeeded.

These results are undeniably fascinating and demonstrate that there is a biological reaction to art, and may even indicate that we have an artistic instinct.  After all, every society has produced art across all of human history. 

Not everyone is singing the same song when it comes to what the study of neurons tells us about our response art.  The philosopher and former clinical scientist, Raymond Tallis says, “Works of art are not merely sources of stimuli that act on bits of brain.  More than anything else, they engage us as human beings.”  Tallis believes that what we think about art is dynamic experience, and what we think about it is influenced by time, place, and personal experience. 

Even though there are disagreements about what the study actually reveals about the way in which our brains process the artistic experience; some principal players in the art world are using the study to try to enhance our aesthetic experience.  Several organizations, including the National Gallery in London and several galleries in the U.S., are applying the science of the brain in their determination of how they light spaces and arrange paintings. 

Artists are also jumping on the brain bandwagon.  Professor and artist Bevil R. Conway, utilizes recent research findings in his work.  He uses the way our eyes and brains process information to enrich certain aspects in his work.  He states, “We know right at the outset in the retina that visual information is coded as spots of light and dark. . . . if I wanted to make read look really red, then I would put it on a green background, because lots of psychophysical work has shown that that kind of color contrast makes things really stand out.” 

It is no surprise that the brain is big business.  Just last year President Obama pledged one hundred million dollars for the Brain Research Initiative.  This collaborative research initiative will work to aid us in understanding how the brain works as well as find new ways to treat and cure illnesses like epilepsy, autism, Alzheimer’s as well traumatic brain injury.  There is a similar venture in Europe known as the Human Brain Project.  Click here: to read more about the U.S. Brain Research Initiative.

It is fascinating that some of the people in the art world have incorporated brain research into their work.  It does appear that neuroaesthetics provide some validity to the physical and emotional relationship that humans have with art; but it can also be said that this research could prove to be unrewarding because so much of what humans deem as “art” is personal, subjective and intangible. 

Even with recent scientific discoveries, the questions about art and beauty remain.  While, our appreciation of art may be partly biological, human creativity is not just the work of the individual brain, but also of a collective human society, culture, and history.

E.H.