Yes, objet petit a and Deleuze & Guattari’s line of flight share a similar logic of escape and excess, but they operate in different conceptual frameworks. While both resist full integration into structured systems, they differ in their dynamics, implications, and modes of resistance.
1. Objet Petit a: The Unattainable Object of Desire (Lacan)
In Lacan’s psychoanalytic theory, objet petit a is the remainder, the excess that cannot be fully symbolized or integrated into discourse.
It is what the subject endlessly desires but can never fully obtain - it both structures desire and destabilizes it.
It is not outside the system - it is generated by it. The symbolic order produces objet petit a as an effect, as the leftover that keeps the subject hooked into desire.
Example: The capitalist system constantly produces new objet petit a - an ever-changing array of must-have products that promise satisfaction but never truly deliver.
2. Line of Flight: The Path to Escape (Deleuze & Guattari)
In Deleuze & Guattari’s schizoanalysis, a line of flight is a trajectory of escape, a rupture from a structured system.
A line of flight does not return to the system or sustain it - it breaks away, deterritorializing the structure itself.
It is not a remainder but an active force of transformation, an impulse toward new ways of being.
Example: A revolutionary movement or an intense creative act might be a line of flight - something that disrupts and changes the order, rather than sustaining its functioning.
3. Key Difference: Sustaining vs. Escaping the System
|
Concept |
Objet Petit a (Lacan) |
Line of Flight (D&G) |
|
Role in System |
A leftover produced by the system to sustain desire |
A movement that escapes the system, deterritorializing it |
|
Effect on the Subject |
Keeps the subject hooked into desire, never fully satisfied |
Leads to transformation, escape, or radical change |
|
Relationship to Structure |
Generated within the system and keeps it running |
Breaks the system, creating new possibilities |
|
Example |
A new fashion trend that keeps capitalism going |
A nomadic tribe escaping a collapsing empire |
4. Can We Say That Objet Petit a Is a Line of Flight?
Not exactly. Objet petit a prevents escape - it is what keeps the subject attached to the system, precisely because it is never fully obtained.
A line of flight, by contrast, escapes entirely - it does not function as an unattainable lure but as a force of rupture and deterritorialization.
However, a failed line of flight could become an objet petit a - for example, when a revolutionary movement gets co-opted and turned into a brand or an aesthetic trend.
5. What Would a True Line of Flight Look Like?
For a line of flight to remain truly transformative, it must not return to the system - it must continue to mutate, escape, deterritorialize.
In contrast, objet petit an always pulls the subject back into the system - it functions as a bait, not an exit.
6. Final Thought: The Danger of False Lines of Flight
Capitalism is good at turning lines of flight into objet petit a.
A punk movement becomes a clothing brand.
A countercultural revolution becomes a Netflix documentary.
A radical philosophy becomes an academic career.
Deleuze & Guattari warn that not all lines of flight lead to liberation - some lead to new forms of control (micro-fascisms).
True escape means continuing the line of flight, never letting it be captured.
Conclusion
No, objet petit a is not the same as a line of flight - it is what keeps you from taking the line of flight.
It is the thing that hooks you, keeps you wanting, keeps you in the system.
A true line of flight, in contrast, is when you stop chasing objet petit a and actually escape the structure entirely.
