One of the main existential topics of Nausea is Sartre’s idea that existence comes before essence. Based on this belief, Sartre describes the moments when Roquentin tends to differentiate between the physical world and human consciousness. In other words, subjectivity is one of the major characteristics of the reality as it is up to the human brain to provide the objects and the surrounding reality with meaning. Sartre describes this idea as follows in Nausea: “Black? The root was not black, there was no black on this piece of wood – there was… something else: black, like circle, did not exist” (176). The existence of something comes prior the realization of its essence. The concept of freedom is also one of the main themes in Nausea. Freedom to choose one’s actions and do whatever a human being wants is one of the fundamental rights, according to Sartre. Roquentin desires to have such a freedom but realizes that it is only one part of the concept, according to which freedom is interrelated with responsibility. In other words, people have to be responsible for what they do. Sartre saw a substantial limitation for human beings based on this idea. “I am free: there is absolutely no more reason for living … this freedom is like death” (Sartre 150). Freedom is pointless without meaning. The theme of contingency is another topic worthy of attention. In Nausea, Sartre shares his views regarding the idea that life is pointless by itself. In other words, living is not a purpose of a human being that explains the existence. Roquentin states: “My thought is me: that’s why I can’t stop. I exist because I think… and I can’t stop myself from thinking… If I exist, it is because I am horrified at existing” (Sartre 156). The main character realizes that thinking is existence, so living requires thinking and thus, a human being is not free in this choice if one wants to have a meaningful life. The theme of absurdity is present in Nausea to reflect the controversy of existence if the conscious of Roquentin should determine his existence. In other words, why Roquentin lives if only the understanding of purpose provides living with meaning. The main character is in the trap of this absurd, and he thinks about killing himself. However, according to his perfect logic, he is already dead as he does not determine his existence, having no clear idea what to live for. Roquentin thinks: “But even my death would have been in the way [superfluous]” (Sartre 181). Camus, instead, stood for the idea that absurd in life should make a man live his life rebelliously withstanding the initial meaningless of life, so favored by Sartre. Finally, the indirect neglecting of God’s existence is present in Nausea as well. The ideas that life has no meaning and that only a man can determine his existence assume that there is no power to guide a man’s actions. “The sylphs all round me have let themselves be taken in: they only see the thin film, which proves the existence of God. I see beneath it!” (Sartre 183). By this concept, Sartre emphasizes the superiority of will above everything else, as only guided by will, a man can live meaningfully. Otherwise, suicide is the only choice, as Roquentin wanted but decided not to since he is already dea