Exploitation in The Wider Sense

I think that Switten’s analysis of the technical structure of the troubadour lyric illustrates the depth of the craftsmanship inherent in these songs. It negates the idea that the performances were simple entertainment and reveals the complex phrase structures and cadence patterns embedded in the lyric. The musical theory, if I’m honest, is a little bit over my head but what I am struck by is this exploitation of system in order to further prove the troubadour’s skill. Switten asserts that the “possibilities of combination and re-combination served as powerful stimulus to troubadour invention of new patterns of verbal sound.” With the emergence of the systems came the possibility to play with them. What the troubadour chose to amend or change is what makes the song their own, and emphasizes it’s poignancy. In the Second Example of The Comtessa de Dia lyric “A chanter” Switten explains, “the rhyme scheme is aaaabab. The rhyme sound a changes with every stanza providing a variety of colours”. The exploitation comes from taking a particular rule, for example a rhyme scheme and shaking it up a little. The troubadours did not take the musical codes as rules but impetus for invention. Switten uses the word “colour” to explain that the Comtessa’s artistic choice to change the “a” rhyming sound in each line is what makes it memorable and pleasurable to listen to. The exsistence of these musical systems in the first place is what allows for this creativity. If the "masculine" and "feminine" ending was not structured, then the "poetic effect" of contrasting them in various ways in music would not be possible. I thought about it in the sense of a chemist creating an art pigment and then the artists using it to create a painting. Is it an exploitation or rather a collaboration between system and creativity?
The other part of Switten’s article that particularly struck me was the Performance paragraph. It deals with the pitfalls that occur when we try and recreate an authentic troubadour song now. He seems to be saying that the real issue of performing these songs is whether we, like the troubadours, use what we have of their lyric and use our own artistic license to create something exciting and worthwhile, or do we adhere so “strictly” to the historical notation so that the song becomes “too rigid”. Just as the troubadours exploited the “new sound systems” to create something original, our recreations are forced to “exploit” the remnants of the troubadour lyric noted in manuscript form to create a Performance. I also want to consider the exploitation that Switten raises, of the “preservation in writing” of the troubadour’s song. Switten explains that “we do not know how the songs crossed this gap” “between the creation of troubadour songs” and their being written down in manuscripts. This date gap means that the songs were written down by people who were most likely not the troubadours themselves, who may have imposed their own license onto the lyric. There is a third exploitation then to take into account then; that of the preserver.