Part of working in theatre is receiving feedback. As with all parts of theatre this is a skill set that needs to be developed by artists of all crafts. It’s not always easy to hear feedback, no matter how long you’ve been at it and requires a person to rise above the ego into Chekhov’s higher ego, thus observing the big picture. In my own experience there are 3 common ways people receive feedback.
 
1. Argue the point
This generally indicates that you are taking the feedback as a personal slight. That you have decided the feedback is being given with negative intent. It is combative and closed which will lead those giving feedback to tend towards withholding opinions and put them off working with you in the future. It also means that you miss out on considering fresh perspectives that might help you explore aspects of your work that you’d otherwise not have considered.
 
2. Justify your choices
a. Without being asked. This is similar to arguing the point. It indicates that you aren’t listening to the feedback but instead thinking of ways to prove wrong those who are offering the feedback. Again, why would people want to collaborate with you if you are not willing to consider their perspective?
b. After being asked. This relates more to taking it on board. When someone giving feedback asks you to explain a choice, it means that they are genuinely wanting to fully understand your perspective. They want to collaborate. Waiting to be asked will show you are invested in understanding what they are saying.
 
3. Take it on board
Listen. Hear what the feedback is saying and consider it in context with your vision and intentions. Taking the feedback on board shows that you understand it is being given with a positive intent and that the giver wants to see you succeed. Taking feedback on board shows an open mind. Taking feedback on board invites a multiperspectival approach that will work towards reaching the full potential of your art.  Taking feedback on board does not mean you have to make the edits suggested, just that you’re willing to listen and consider alternative approaches before making a choice.
 
As artists we are vulnerable and give of ourselves when creating. This is why it’s even more important to develop an ability to receive feedback without taking it personally. It’s imperative for good mental health practice in the arts. This is a skill that I was not taught at a young age, unfortunately, and grappled with what I took to be personal criticism for a long time. Instead of hearing, “I’d like to help you”, I was hearing, “you’re not good enough”. It stopped me, for a period, from pursuing a career in the arts that are such a part of who I am. It is my hope, in sharing this now, that it might help someone.

All art is subjective.

It is subjective to our personal tastes and reactions.
It is subjective to the culture within which it is being digested, and the historical time frame. You can't tell me a play will be received exactly the same now as it was a thousand years ago.
Our gender, age, political and philosophical leanings, our religious beliefs or lack thereof... all impact on the way we digest a piece of art and/or the value of the artist.

So how can we label an artist or artwork as best? When it comes to theatre I feel as though our work is always open for reinterpretation, and to be true to our creativity we must observe the multiplicity of perspectives that any audience brings.

I once directed a piece where an audience member was peeved that I staged a scene with the actors facing a giant mirror upstage. "I don't pay to have to look at the actors in a mirror, I paid for the ticket so they should face me!" they exclaimed to one of the actors. Now, beside the fact that I think it's in poor taste to approach an actor directly after a show and criticize said show (also not helpful that the actor was related to me), and that it confuses me that someone who is in the industry would so readily jump to stomp on a directorial decision just because the actors "aren't facing" them, I was not upset in the slightest by the comment, because it's subjective. (Okay, there's also the fact that for that one person there were 30 more who took time to seek me out and mention how much they enjoyed that exact scene.)

My way was not best. It was just my interpretation. When I perform on stage and receive praise it is not because I was best, but rather that I managed to connect with and engage that audience member.

So it disheartens me when I see an arts organisation, especially those who work with young people, talking about the 'best' talent.

I teach my young actors that when they don't get a role it's not because they aren't any good and it's certainly not because someone was better than them; it is for a myriad of directorial decisions that require specific casting choices. I say that, because it is subjective. There's no measurable time, height or distance to validate a 'best' value. There's no way to create an absolute authority to defer to (other than those false gods created by elitism and good marketing which cater to the trite and stale - of course that is merely my opinion).

In short, I say we spend less time creating value classifications when it comes to any kind of art work and spend more time engaging with artists to explore from where their perspective has arisen.

Me:             What do we perform?
Class:         A Play
Me:            Right, it's called a play because that it what we do to explore, interact and understand the story
                   and the meaning and the character... , we play. You can't forget to play.

Play is the methodology for any theatre practitioner worth their salt. It also is something that can be forgotten when the stress of meeting deadlines and the bottom line looms large. When I first learnt about Michael Chekhov's essential quality of 'Ease', it seemed to me that it should be easily achieved if only we could remember to play. 

Approaching our games, activities, rehearsals etc. with this mindset is important if we want to sidestep gravity, in many a sense of the word, and perform with ease.

For example, I play a scene of a mother steeped in grief. Her child is lost and she travels everywhere searching for her. sleep is elusive. Depression is setting in. This is a grave situation, but to remain free and flexible to perform the scene authentically and in the moment I can not actually be depressed, heavy, lethargic etc.. Instead I need to play with these concepts. I need to thrill at what happens when I play with my body shape. I need to feel joy at the ways I can play with my voice to convey a moment in this woman's story. I embrace the moments of engagement with my audience and castmates, as we should any moment of human connection and collective understanding. The story and the character hold gravity... I do not. I revel in my craft and how I might use it to tell the story. As a result I remain responsive and present, and I do not carry the weight of the story away with me. 

As actors, we should never stop playing.