There are two ways of taking something apart.
The first way is to dismantle, where you take care of the pieces you are taking apart, noting the sequence and preserving the small fasteners and anything the thing you are dismantling was attached to. You try not to break the pieces and keep them in the order in which they were dismantled.
The second way is to demolish, where you utterly destroy the thing you are taking apart and all of its components, without heed of the order in which it went together in the first place and without a care about what you will do with the waste or what the thing you are dismantling was attached to.
Dismantling is usually done so that you can understand the hidden workings of something, put it right and then carefully reassemble it once again, only better than it was before. It’s constructive destruction and can reduce waste.
Demolition has no intention of fixing anything. The aim is to brutally destroy and leave devastation in its wake. It’s pure wanton destruction and usually leads to more waste. The intention is to be rid of the thing that is being demolished and to reuse no remaining part of it. It all becomes worthless junk.
Dismantling involves care and understanding.
Demolition involves brute force and ignorance.
When critiquing somebody else’s art, are you a dismantler or a demolisher? Are your comments aimed at understanding where improvements could be made, with the intention of helping the artist carefully reassemble their work, but better than before, or are you out to destroy their work, the artist and anything surrounding the endeavour, in an act of biblically proportioned vandalism?
As an artist, do you seek to improve your work through constructive dismantling, or do you simply demolish anything you made that you don’t like, without understanding why it turned out that way?
Deconstruction is subtle, if done well.