I read an article once that made an interesting point. I'm sorry, I was 90% sure it was on smashing, but I couldn't find it. However, the takeaway for me was to set ground rules before starting a review. The first rule was to relay a set of words that were considered "out-of-bounds". Basically a list of words that could not be used during the session. I believe I could fairly assume the first word on your list would be "clean".
The second thing I would do is go back to my design criteria. I would write questions based on the criteria listed. For example, "does my main call-to-action inspire the appropriate response", "is the brand accurately reflected", etc..
The third thing I would do is evaluate a list of standard design criteria, like this one, and write questions that would make sense to the evaluating group or person.
To sum it up, you never want to go into a review cold. Have a plan, if you have the time, send over the review questions with the rules and design. Give the intended reviewer a chance to think about the questions. I would limit your questions to 10, anything more than that is too much for your average person.
If you don't want to send anything ahead of time, be sure to at least send and agenda stating the how you plan to approach the design. For example one of my standards would be: Introductions (if need be), review of the process so far (or how we got here, which would include the agreed upon requirements), guidelines (rules sounds restricting), then the actual design review, (during which I would read the questions and take notes, lots and lots of notes)