As cultural renegades of the art and architecture world, it's safe to say both have more similarities than differences. During their careers, both have had their hand in art and architecture practice. Ai Weiwei has collaborated with Herzog & de Meuron for the Beijing Olympic's 2008 Bird's Nest stadium as well as his design works for an art gallery in Beverly Hills. Frank Gehry has produced sculptural pieces like his memorable Fish Lamps and his cardboard Carumba Experimental Edges chair. After their contributions to the Deitch's gallery, Gehry who designed the space and Weiwei exhibiting his work, the two sat together to discuss their views on architecture, art, and their iconic professional careers.

Below are excerpts taken from their conversation with the NY Times written by Jori Finkel.

When discussing project freedoms between galleries and developers the two discussed their experiences.

FG: You know, I grew up in the art world — this was the way I wanted to work, more hands-on, sort of like the way you work. You pick up materials, you put them somewhere, you make things. I always felt that it was more direct, more human, more related to the body. In the late ’60s and early ’70s I saw all the artists in L.A. doing things, like Larry Bell and Billy Al Bengston, Charles Arnoldi and Ed Ruscha. Everybody was working very freely and I emulated that, I loved that. So you had a sense of freedom, you didn’t have to make apologies for doing it. It was just hard for the clients of an architect to accept that. Now developers charge a premium for our work. But you have a whole other economic thing with galleries.

AW: I can go through a gallery, but it’s not necessary. A gallery is just a structure that you use because you don’t want to make all those deals or meet all those collectors. It’s not necessary. It’s not like a building, which has to be paid for by some developer. Artworks don’t have to be sold. A poet doesn’t have to sell his poetry, nobody has to buy it.

FG: I think it’s important to find that sweet spot in architecture, too, to make it happen like that.

AW: But architecture is very limited because you have so many practical and financial restrictions — you have that developer to think about.

FG: You have all that, but I say, “And then what?” You have to look at it this way: You solve all the economic issues. You solve the safety of the building. You solve the acceptance by the building department. You solve all of those things. And then what? It’s the “then what” that I’m interested in. What else can the building give you? And when you do that, the people that hired you are beneficiaries of it.

When the topic of legos came about both had their perspectives on the beloved toy and medium. 

FG: So why did you pick Legos to work with?

AW: When I was working on Alcatraz, we got a lot of photos of these political prisoners from Amnesty International that were not clear or were very dark. Some political prisoners may have had only one photo from their life before they disappeared, like this Tibetan lama who has been missing for over 20 years. How am I going to use these photos to make a show when the quality isn’t there? I thought Legos would be a good idea to even it all out because it’s pixels — pixels will make everything, clear or not, sharp: a strong image. So we made 176 portraits of political prisoners, from Chelsea Manning to people in Iran and Russia and China, and they all looked fresh and clear.

FG: I met with the guy who owns Lego years ago; I wanted to discuss the possibility of doing a new kind of Lego.

AW: Another kind of Lego sounds interesting. You can see, if you walk on the streets of most cities, all the buildings are the same. All the cars are designed the same. Why does it have to be that way? It’s such a waste. A society based on artists could be trouble, but a society without artists could be really horrifying.

On discussing architecture Gehry and Weiwei shared their perspectives on building materials.

FG: When I started in architecture, I was aware that I was coming into a world where the cities were being built quick and ugly, and there was a lot of denial. People hated it, but they didn’t seem to care they were doing it. I was curious about how you connect to that denial, so I picked the worst material that everyone really hates, chain-link, and said, “What if I tried to take chain-link and make it part of the art, part of the beauty? What if it became more positive?”

AW: When the China Academy of Art offered their first architecture course, they invited me to be their first teacher for this class. Instead of asking them to build with bricks, I asked the students to look at things we throw away. I said, “Let’s start with plastic bottles or Coca-Cola bottles. How can you use the logic of a material to structure something?”

FG: Now people are realizing all this plastic is dangerous to our health.

To view the entire conversation click here.