I have been reading over my dreams from the past year. Some are quite good, while others are devoid of any literary merit. There would be seem to be two steps:
having the dream, the raw material
the writing of the dream
Obviously, the dream can be well-written--or not. What makes a good dream-text, though, is the raw material, since the writing is something I can do well, if I try. It won't work to write with great skill a dream of no merit.
Or the other theory would be that writing can make anything worth while. I am not quite sure. I am not careful about writing them well, since I can always revise them for style. The writing cannot improve the raw material, only represent it with more panache.
It's like when Denby says there are two parts to being a dance critic: seeing the dance, and then writing the article. This is quite clear.
What I am after is a particular relation to the dream material. It cannot be overly admiring (of my own dreams!) or self-congratulatory. Yet clearly there is some interest there for me; I must be saying they are worthy listening to.
Surely the value is the sheer bulk, not simply the the "greatest hits."