I'm in the midst of having my book critiqued, which is a very fascinating, helpful and difficult process.
It's fascinating to see your book through someone else's eyes, to get an idea of what they are getting out of it. It's helpful because they are trying to do everything they can so that you can strip your book of all the crap and make it the best it can be (every "negative" comment is just helpful, I must remind myself). And it's difficult because suddenly you realize just how much work you still have to do on your book. Sigh.
But it's also kind of exciting, thinking about all of these things that I can and will do to make my story soooo much better.
One thing that I've noticed is how much I will ignore things while writing that I KNOW are problems. For example there's this one scene where my MC breaks into somewhere, and I knew when I wrote it that it was waaay too easy for him to gain access, but I didn't fix it because I was lazy. That wasn't the only time I just wrote something because it was easier.
If it's too easy, it could be better, I've learned.
I actually came to this conclusion while reading Catching Fire. I always wondered why Suzanne Collins came up with multiple scenarios for The Hunger Games. The way I read it, it didn't seem necessary that she give in-detail descriptions of past Games. The thing is, maybe it wasn't necessary, but it sure made the book better.
That's the thing about having CPs. They call you out on all the stuff you just ignored because you were lazy. (And a lot more).
Now, as always happens when you do a haphazard job, I must go back and pick up after my laziness...