Introduction: “Cultural Studies In The Present Tense” by Bryan G. Behrenshausen
“Cultural Studies in the Present Tense” by Bryan G. Behrenshausen first appeared in 2019 in the journal Cultural Studies (Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 68–74), published by Taylor & Francis. This pivotal essay marks a significant contribution to contemporary literary and cultural theory by reasserting the radical contextualism and temporality at the heart of the cultural studies project. Framed as a tribute to Lawrence Grossberg, the piece critiques static understandings of “the present” and instead insists on its construction through complex, contingent arrangements of power and meaning. Behrenshausen emphasizes that cultural studies is not merely about the now but is committed to understanding the political stakes of narrating “what’s going on” at any given moment. Through the provocative questions Grossberg posed—”What is old? What is new? What is rearticulated?”—the essay underscores cultural studies’ refusal to reduce cultural forces to singular explanations and its capacity for endless reflexive adaptation. As Behrenshausen writes, cultural studies theorizes even the “conditions of its own demise,” highlighting its uniquely self-interrogative posture within intellectual traditions. The article draws from foundational thinkers like Raymond Williams, Michel Foucault, Stuart Hall, and Deleuze, positioning itself as both a methodological guide and a theoretical reflection on the evolving role of cultural studies amid shifting conjunctures.
Summary of “Cultural Studies In The Present Tense” by Bryan G. Behrenshausen
🔴 Radical Contextualism as a Methodological Core
- Cultural Studies is grounded in radical contextualism — the refusal to accept anything as fixed, final, or given.
- ✨ “It accepts nothing as given, nothing as final, nothing as fixed, nothing as permanent – everything as contingent (and yet no less real or effective for being so)” (Behrenshausen, 2019, p. 69; citing Grossberg, 2010, p. 20).
- Cultural Studies begins with the question: “What is going on?”, borrowing Marvin Gaye’s lyric as a foundational inquiry.
🟡 Conjunctural Analysis: Always Situated, Never Singular
- Cultural Studies analyzes conjunctures—the complex arrangements of historical, political, and cultural forces at work in a given moment.
- 🌐 “Cultural Studies is nothing if not conjunctural, if not attentive to the particular arrangement of forces aligned precisely this way” (p. 68).
- There is sustained skepticism toward any theory that tries to explain culture through a single “motor force.”
🟢 Temporal Focus: The Present as an Object of Analysis
- Cultural Studies is radically presentist—focused on how the present is constructed and felt.
- ⏳ “Temporality itself [is] a conjunctural phenomenon” shaped by arrangements of forces (p. 70).
- 🕰️ “What’s old? What’s new? What’s rearticulated?” become central analytic tools (Grossberg, 2010, p. 60).
🔵 Good Stories vs. Ideological Comfort
- The goal is not to reaffirm political beliefs, but to narrate the present in ways that open new possibilities.
- 🗣️ “A story isn’t ‘better’ if it merely allows researchers to express their uninterrogated political positions… A story is ‘better’ if it’s most attentive to the concrete and specific conditions of a conjuncture” (p. 69).
- 📚 Better stories “make more seeable and sayable” (Deleuze, 1988; cited on p. 69).
🟣 Historicizing the Present Without Linear Time
- Cultural Studies treats time as layered and nonlinear, embracing Raymond Williams’ concept of “structure of feeling.”
- 💫 “The present is what’s ‘already happened’ and ‘what’s going to happen’… they set a cadence” (Williams, 1977, pp. 121–127, cited on p. 70).
- Even what appears new is often a rearticulation of past forces.
🟠 Theorizing Its Own Demise
- Cultural Studies theorizes the conditions of its own obsolescence, adapting continually to shifting contexts.
- 🔄 “It also recognizes the limits of any engaged intellectual practice to be the limits of the very context that produces and demands that practice” (p. 71).
- As Grossberg (1988) argues, Cultural Studies is inherently scandalous to traditional disciplines because it offers no universal theory—only temporary, tactical ones.
🟤 The Present as a Constructed and Political Space
- Drawing from Foucault and Kant, Behrenshausen explains the present as a constructed mode of “belonging and task” (Foucault, 2010, p. 39).
- 🧠 “The present is effective only insofar as social actors connect to it as part of their strategies for continuing to exist in it” (p. 71).
⚫ Cultural Studies as Comportment, Not Method
- It’s not a single theory or method, but a way of inhabiting the roles of scholar, teacher, and artist.
- 📍 “Cultural Studies is neither a theory of the present nor a method… It is a comportment toward the present-as-effective-construction” (p. 72; citing Grossberg, 2010, p. 9).
- It resists finality, refusing to “settle” into fixed academic roles or canons.
Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Cultural Studies In The Present Tense” by Bryan G. Behrenshausen
| Theoretical Term / Concept | Usage in the Article |
| Radical Contextualism | Describes the fundamental orientation of cultural studies—nothing is taken as fixed, all meaning is contingent upon context. “It accepts nothing as given… everything as contingent (and yet no less real or effective for being so)” (p. 69). |
| Conjuncture / Conjunctural Analysis | Cultural Studies analyzes the present as a specific constellation of forces. “Cultural Studies is nothing if not conjunctural” (p. 68). Each moment is shaped by intersecting, historical, political, and cultural pressures. |
| Presentism / Radical Presentism | The essay asserts that Cultural Studies is committed to the analysis of the present—not by ignoring history, but by understanding the now as historically constituted. “Cultural Studies’ embrace of radical contextualism is also a penchant for radical presentism” (p. 70). |
| Structure of Feeling (from Raymond Williams) | Used to describe how multiple temporalities and emotional tones intersect in a given moment. “That structure consists of crisscrossing temporal hues that bend and bleed to saturate a conjuncture” (p. 70). |
| Rearticulation | Key concept borrowed from Grossberg; highlights how cultural elements can be recombined in new ways. Larry says, “Everything is rearticulated” (p. 70). |
| Political History of the Present | A goal of Cultural Studies—to create stories that explain the power dynamics of the present moment. “To make sense of the complexities of contemporary culture… to tell better stories about the world than those we already have” (Rodman, 2013, p. 352; cited on p. 69). |
| Banality | Referenced from Seigworth and Morris—what is seen as mundane or ordinary is often politically meaningful. The “banal” carries historic and cultural weight (p. 71). |
| Obsolescence / Theorizing Its Own Demise | Cultural Studies is reflexive; it constantly reexamines and critiques itself. “Cultural Studies essentially theorizes the conditions of its own demise!” (p. 71). |
| Comportment | A way of inhabiting intellectual life—not a method, but a disposition toward the world. “Cultural Studies is neither a theory of the present nor a method… it is a comportment toward the present-as-effective-construction” (p. 72). |
| Attitude (from Kant and Foucault) | The “present” is framed as an attitude or mode of engaging with reality, not just a temporal location. “A way of thinking and feeling… a way of acting and behaving” (Foucault, 2010, p. 39; cited on p. 71). |
Contribution of “Cultural Studies In The Present Tense” by Bryan G. Behrenshausen to Literary Theory/Theories
🔴 Cultural Materialism / Marxist Literary Theory
- Emphasizes that meaning and cultural forms are shaped by conjunctures—constellations of political, social, and historical forces.
- 📍 “Cultural Studies refuses… the overmastering influence of any immediate and singular force… [and] treats everything… as resources for unpacking and explicating the complexity of those forces” (p. 68).
- 📘 Contributes to Marxist literary theory by expanding Raymond Williams’ idea of structures of feeling as dynamic and non-linear (Williams, 1977).
🟡 Poststructuralism / Deconstruction
- Questions the stability of historical categories and challenges essentialist readings of “the present” or “truth”.
- 🌀 “Nothing is final, nothing is fixed, nothing is permanent – everything is contingent” (p. 69).
- 📘 Engages poststructuralist skepticism of fixed narratives and embraces Foucauldian historicity.
🟢 Narrative Theory / Storytelling as Political Praxis
- Argues for the power of “better stories” to reframe cultural and political realities.
- 📖 “Better stories make more seeable and sayable” (p. 69; citing Deleuze, 1988).
- 📘 This supports narrative theory in emphasizing the politics of storytelling and representation.
🔵 Temporality and Historicism
- Develops a complex, layered understanding of time in cultural analysis.
- ⏳ “What’s old? What’s new? What’s rearticulated?… The present is what’s ‘already happened’ and ‘what’s going to happen'” (p. 70).
- 📘 Advances new historicist and temporal theory by resisting linear temporality and stressing conjunctural time.
🟣 Cultural Studies as Intellectual Work (Stuart Hall’s Legacy)
- Reinforces Hall’s distinction between academic and intellectual labor.
- 📚 “Cultural Studies is a disposition… ‘intellectual’ work that may or may not occur in an ‘academic’ setting” (p. 72; citing Hall, 1992, p. 286).
- 📘 Broadens the boundaries of literary criticism to include affective, political, and interdisciplinary practice.
🟠 Reflexivity and Anti-Canon Formation
- Challenges the idea of stable theoretical canons by insisting Cultural Studies is always “theorizing its own demise.”
- 🔁 “Cultural Studies… must continuously question its positions in the light of emergent political and historical challenges” (p. 72; citing Grossberg, 1988, p. 7).
- 📘 Influences anti-canon and anti-essentialist theories by prioritizing adaptability and self-critique.
🟤 Critical Theory and the Role of the Intellectual
- Suggests a rethinking of the scholar’s role—not as neutral observer but as active participant in shaping the present.
- 🎓 “Cultural Studies is a comportment toward the present-as-effective-construction” (p. 72).
- 📘 This reframes the critical theorist as someone embedded in power struggles and cultural reconfigurations.
⚫ Literary Studies as Conjunctural Practice
- Invites literary critics to consider texts not as autonomous objects, but as moments within historical conjunctures.
- 🧩 “Cultural Studies is the study of the contemporary, the way a given conjunctural configuration defines the conditions of life within it” (p. 71).
- 📘 Aligns with contextual and ideological criticism in literary studies.
Examples of Critiques Through “Cultural Studies In The Present Tense” by Bryan G. Behrenshausen
| Literary Work | Critique Through “Cultural Studies in the Present Tense” | Key Concept Applied |
| George Orwell’s 1984 | Instead of reading Orwell’s dystopia as purely Cold War propaganda, a conjunctural analysis would treat 1984 as a product of intersecting fears around surveillance, fascism, and media manipulation. It also invites rearticulation in the post-9/11 context of digital surveillance. | 🟡 Conjuncture 🔁 Rearticulation |
| Toni Morrison’s Beloved | Rather than reducing it to a historical novel about slavery, a radical contextualist reading would examine how the novel disrupts dominant narratives of Black suffering and memory in ways that speak directly to present racialized trauma. | 🔴 Radical Contextualism 🕰️ History of the Present |
| Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale | Applying Behrenshausen’s framework shows how the novel constructs a “better story” that critically narrates patriarchal power and religious fundamentalism—not as universal themes, but as formations specific to late 20th-century U.S. culture and revived in today’s reproductive politics. | 📚 Better Stories 🧠 Temporality as Construct |
| Kazuo Ishiguro’s Never Let Me Go | The novel can be read through the lens of cultural studies’ concern with what’s “sayable and seeable.” The narrative’s suppression of outrage over cloning reflects the banal normalization of biopolitics, rearticulated through neoliberal care systems. | 🟤 Banality ⚫ Structure of Feeling |
Criticism Against “Cultural Studies In The Present Tense” by Bryan G. Behrenshausen
🔴 Theoretical Ambiguity
- While the essay celebrates radical contextualism, it risks becoming too vague or anti-systematic.
- ❗ “Nothing is fixed” can lead to theoretical relativism, where no position can be critically evaluated or defended rigorously.
- Critics might argue it avoids providing a clear analytic toolkit, making it hard to apply across disciplines or cases.
🟡 Methodological Uncertainty
- Behrenshausen explicitly states that Cultural Studies is not a method but a comportment—a stance or disposition.
- ❓ This can be frustrating for scholars seeking more concrete research strategies or analytical steps.
- The lack of methodological clarity could make it difficult to teach or standardize as a critical practice.
🟢 Presentism and Historical Flattening
- While the essay insists it doesn’t abandon history, its emphasis on the “now” risks downplaying historical depth or longue durée structures.
- 🕰️ Critics might ask: Does this “radical presentism” ignore enduring ideologies and economic systems that transcend individual conjunctures?
🔵 Over-Reliance on Grossberg’s Voice
- The essay is shaped as a tribute to Lawrence Grossberg, and while intellectually rich, it can feel too anchored in one thinker’s legacy.
- 📘 Critics may note the need for a more diverse theoretical genealogy, incorporating other voices beyond Grossberg and Hall.
🟣 Insularity of Cultural Studies Jargon
- The text uses dense terms like rearticulation, conjuncture, structure of feeling, often without unpacking them for broader audiences.
- 🧩 This makes the essay less accessible to newcomers, potentially reinforcing the critique that Cultural Studies is “too self-referential.”
🟠 Lack of Concrete Cultural Examples
- The article reflects more on theory and pedagogy than actual texts or cultural artifacts.
- 📉 For a piece about narrating “better stories,” there’s a surprising absence of applied analysis of literature, media, or politics.
⚫ Perpetual Reflexivity = Paralysis?
- Constantly “theorizing its own demise” might be intellectually virtuous—but some critics argue it leads to strategic indecision.
- 🔄 When everything is always shifting and rearticulated, what can Cultural Studies actually do besides comment on its own limits?
Representative Quotations from “Cultural Studies In The Present Tense” by Bryan G. Behrenshausen with Explanation
| Quotation | Explanation |
| “Cultural Studies is nothing if not conjunctural.” (p. 68) | This central claim asserts that Cultural Studies is fundamentally about analyzing specific, contingent combinations of cultural, historical, and political forces. |
| “Good stories tell us what’s goin’ on.” (p. 69) | Quoting Grossberg via Marvin Gaye, Behrenshausen argues that the best critical analyses illuminate the present moment by narrating its underlying complexities. |
| “Nothing is final, nothing is fixed, nothing is permanent – everything as contingent (and yet no less real or effective for being so).” (p. 69) | This articulates the core principle of radical contextualism: that everything must be understood in flux, yet still as meaningful and impactful. |
| “Everything is rearticulated.” (p. 70) | A powerful claim suggesting that cultural forms and meanings are never static; they’re constantly being recombined and recontextualized. |
| “What’s new? What’s old? What’s rearticulated?” (Grossberg 2010, p. 60) | These are the guiding questions of a conjunctural approach. Behrenshausen presents them as essential to understanding the political present. |
| “Better stories make more seeable and sayable.” (p. 69; referencing Deleuze) | Invokes the power of narrative to expand political and cultural imagination—showing what might otherwise remain invisible or unspeakable. |
| “Cultural Studies essentially theorizes the conditions of its own demise!” (p. 71) | A key theoretical provocation—Cultural Studies is so self-reflexive that it interrogates the very context that allows it to exist, even if that means destabilizing itself. |
| “Cultural Studies is a comportment toward the present-as-effective-construction.” (p. 72) | Cultural Studies is framed not as a rigid methodology, but as a way of being intellectually present in the world—responsive and engaged. |
| “The present is effective only insofar as social actors connect to it as part of their strategies for continuing to exist in it.” (p. 71) | Emphasizes the constructed, strategic nature of how individuals and groups inhabit “the present.” |
| “What worked when today was tomorrow certainly won’t work when today becomes yesterday.” (p. 71) | A poetic way of explaining the demand for continuous theoretical adaptation within Cultural Studies. What was once useful must be reassessed as contexts change. |
Suggested Readings: “Cultural Studies In The Present Tense” by Bryan G. Behrenshausen
- Behrenshausen, Bryan G. “Cultural studies in the present tense.” Cultural studies 33.1 (2019): 68-74.
- Anna Kornbluh. “Present Tense Futures of the Past.” Victorian Studies, vol. 59, no. 1, 2016, pp. 98–101. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2979/victorianstudies.59.1.07. Accessed 3 Apr. 2025.
- Beckwith, Susan Lynn, and John R. Reed. “Impounding the Future: Some Uses of the Present Tense in Dickens and Collins.” Dickens Studies Annual, vol. 32, 2002, pp. 299–318. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/44372061. Accessed 3 Apr. 2025.
- Miyahara, Kazunari. “Why Now, Why Then?: Present-Tense Narration in Contemporary British and Commonwealth Novels.” Journal of Narrative Theory, vol. 39, no. 2, 2009, pp. 241–68. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41427206. Accessed 3 Apr. 2025.