Madonna And Guy Ritchie: Forget Their Earnings, Whose Cultural Product Is Worth Less?

Posted at 11:06 AM Oct 16, 2008

By Kenny Herzog

Since news emerged of Madonna and Guy Ritchie's official split (sorry for not breaking the info ourselves last night, but soooome of us were busy watching the possible future leaders of our nation get it on--debate style), the talk has surrounded how much of Madge's material earnings Mr. Ciccone would come away with. Would he pull a Heather Mills or a Phil Collins' ex, or would he get swept away in disadvantageous divorce proceedings?

But to me, the funnier scenario would involve quantifying their collective intellectual property and divvying it up. Sure, you can argue that the bulk of Madonna's savings were earned by her hard work, and that Ritchie's recent films even benefitted from lecherous attention. But what kind of value would be placed on the timeless societal contribution that was her kid's book, The Children's Roses versus the instant 4 a.m. cable anti-classic RocknRolla? Or likewise, used VHS copies of the Griffin Dunne romp Who's That Girl? placed against the self-referential rehash clunker Snatch? Don't even get us started on who to saddle with disproportionate credit (or blame) for Swept Away.

Eh, we could always just put their intellectual property up for public sale in conjunction with a police auction. Then we see what fetches a higher price to gauge which of the couple should be more embarrassed by how they've negatively corroded each other's creativity.

Come to think of it, maybe the most pressing question is, does this mean Madonna will no longer be British?