ATDTDA (13): Reef's dead, 362-364

[mikebailey at speakeasy.net]

Paul Nightingale

> Cf. ". if these plutes were undeniably
> evil hombres, then how much more so were those who took care of their
> problems for them, in no matter what ignorance of why, not all of their
> faces on the wanted bills ." (362).

this was the sentence that James Wood looked at...
it veers off - imho - away from strict grammatical sense
at the point of "not all of their faces..."

doesn't it?  we're okay up thru "in no matter what ignorance
of why" -- 
            the plutes are evil

            those who do they bidding even more so
           (framed questioningly - as if in wonderment - or Wobbly rhetoric
             like, here's something you may not have considered)
           
           whether they know why (ie why they are offered jobs
           enabling class oppression) doesn't affect 
           the fact of their guilt

       but, then "not all of their faces" - 
       1) on the wanted bills?  these guys are the sheriffs & enforcers
               so their faces wouldn't be on the wanted bills
       2) or are the ignorant minions gazing at the wanted bills
               but what is it that all the faces are not doing?
    
              - I can't find a clear antecedent before the
              "not all" for any of the thoughts thereafter

and I don't think Pynchon is trailing off because unable 
or unwilling to complete his thought, or having been beguiled
by some "fine writing" out of making sense.
It's not like the man to do that...
However, can't claim I know exactly what's going on here.
Other than it strikes me as a very bizarre sentence (the weirdest
bit to come to my attention since the pearl message)