One of the Beatles' most inscrutible efforts is “Lady Madonna, baby at your breast, how do you manage to pay the rent.” It is especially inscrutible because it comes at the heels of another major Beatles hit, “I don't care too much for money cause money can't buy me love.” Which one is it? Is the work that Madonna does worthless, or is she doing something that means something? In Brothers Karamazov, the businessman tells the preacher that he is doing what he is doing at other people's expense. In fact the preacher was doing something that was very valuable. He was teaching people ethics that made people employable; and the businessman owed a lot to the priest. Can Lady Madonna pay the rent? Whether she does or she doesn't says everything about where we are as a society. Do we reward righteous and altruistic behavior? Or do we proclaim such things worthless even as we continue to benefit from such behavior? So here we have a band impugning altruistic conduct even as he attacks money-making. This is wrong in just about every possible way. Both lady Madonna and people who are money-driven are better than people who attack both altruism and money-making. And I would rather be dealing with either of the preceding than with people who attack the above without suggesting a viable alternative.
So first you say Lady Madonna is hard to understand, and then you criticise the message with a dodgy interpretation? It seems to me Lady Madonna is sympathising with the woes of working class Catholic women (based on quotes from the song's wiki page), which seems consistent with the Beatles' rather left-wing views. Money can't buy me love seems to talk about frivolous spending (mostly goes on about diamond rings), i.e. the spending of those who have money (at least above sustenance level). That also seems consistent with the Beatles' views.
