After reading the Dramatica Theory book, it stated that Gone with the Wind used archetypal characters to explore it's more complex theme. The problem is that in the book I learn to build complex characters but not complex themes, so I was wondering how to build complex themes, and how do I know if I have a complex theme.

In each throughline is an Issue. This is the MOST thematic point of exploration of the throughline. Exploring the throughline Issues is the minimum required for a grand argument story.

Each thematic point has a counterpoint, such as Morality vs. Self Interest, Desire vs. Ability, Security vs. Threat, etc. Exploring the balance between the thematic point and counterpoint develops theme to a greater level than just exploring the thematic Issue.

You can delve into even greater thematic depth by evaluating the thematic point and counterpoint in terms of the co-dynamic pair in the same structural quad in which the Issue is found. For example, Morality and Self Interest can be more deeply examined in terms of Attitude and Approach; Security and Threat can be more fully understood in terms of Fact and Fantasy. Creating relative and comparitive assessments of each item in an a throughline's Issue quad gives you the opportunity to explore your story's themes with a greater degree of subtlety than examining an Issue by itself.

I am quite a fan of Dramatica theory. It works well for me, especially the character stuff. Where I'm having problems is with plot. So here is a question: I'm looking at the script to Witness. I would like to break it up into it's six sequences. Supposedly, the sequences are:

• Delay/Choice
• Delay/Preconception
• Delay/Openness
• Choice/Preconception
• Choice/Openness
• Openness/Preconception

So what is the ordering of these sequences, what are the specific examples from the script, and where are the breaks between them?

First off, you can organize the order of the sequence any way you want. So, the order you have chosen may be the one in Witness, or some permutation of it may be more appropriate. Secondly, I've never read the script and it's been a little while since I've seen the movie, but I'll give it a try using the sequence you provided.

• Delay/Choice comes at the very beginning of the movie. Rachel is barely widowed when a local suitor (Daniel) makes it very clear that she is his choice for a wife. She delays the matter by going to visit her sister "among the English." Delay is shown to be advantageous. Choice is not.
• Delay/Preconception seems to come when the police are first introduced to the "witness" and his mother. Rachel is concerned about the delays to their trip, while the police express concerns about certain preconceptions of Amish and children witnesses. This thematic exploration continues on through the roughing up of suspects (preconception of guilty parties), and up to the point John realizes the bad guys are cops (Samuel's choice of perps).
• Delay/Openness starts with a touch of it in the witnesses at John's sister's house segment ("Your sister says..."). It really takes hold during John's early recovery from the gunshot wound while staying amongst the Amish. Rachel uses John's condition to delay her complete withdrawal from the English by bringing him home. The elders show great openness by allowing John to be healed and recuperate at Eli's home.
• Choice/Preconception seems to begin about the time the boy Samuel finds the gun. This brings up issues of choice of life-style and the preconceptions the English have of the Amish, and vice versa. This continues through the discovery of what is and is not permissible amongst the Amish, and discussion of characters' life choices (most particularly John's and Rachel's).
• Choice/Openness comes to the forefront during the barn building sequence. Rachel seems to openly flaunt her clear choice of John over Daniel. Meanwhile, John is more open to the positives of Amish life and both he and Daniel recognize the choices each must make. The Amish women are somewhat scandalized by Rachel's choice AND openness of her preferences.
• Openness/Preconception opens with Eli confronting Rachel about her relationship and her place in his home, and climaxes with John's speech to his boss Chief Schaefer. This scene contrasts the openness of the Amish Society and the exposure of the Chief's wrongdoings to an innocent crowd with the single-minded, preconceived view of the world held by Chief Schaefer (and, to some degree, John Book).

Ultimately, the thematic conflict of Delay vs. Choice is played, rehashed and emphasized in the final scenes. Both John and Rachel realize that the delay has given each of them time to explore the potential opportunities. Rachel chooses to stay among the Amish. John chooses to return to the English. And as John drives away, he passes good ol' Daniel coming to pay a call on his original choice for his wife.

That's a rough guestimate of the OS thematic sequence for Witness. There's a lot of wiggle room when you're talking about thematics, but I hope this gives you some direction for use in your own work.

A friend of mine is interested in writing a story in which the overall concept of the conflict involves egocentric, sexual love vs. a deep, spiritual love for another. Is it possible to start from this concept of "conflict" and find a storyform in Dramatica? It strikes me that Morality vs. Self-Interest might speak to this, but I don't want to mislead in or get her bogged down too much.

In Dramatica, "theme" is not so much about subject matter but what you have to say ABOUT the subject matter. In your friend's story, "Sexual Love vs. Spiritual Love" would be the thematic subject matter. You could say all sorts of things about that subject matter, including using Morality vs. Self-Interest as you suggest. Without knowing your friend's opinion of her subject matter, it's difficult to know what would work best for her. For the sake of example, here are some possibilities that I've picked randomly:

Truth vs. Falsehood -- "Love that grows from spiritual strength is true love while love based on physical desires fosters lies and deceptions"; or its inverse, "Love based on the physical aspects of human beings is more true to human nature than the delusions inspired by purportedly lofty, intangible, spiritual love."

Expediency vs. Need -- "Love based on sexual convenience is far more satisfying than love inspired by some spiritual need"; or its inverse, "Spiritual love is often far more convenient than the needs satisfied by sexual lovemaking."

All you need to do is pick any of the variations of dynamic pairs and use them to provide commentary on the subject matter at hand.

I want my story to thematically be about consequences of actions, and how people deal with them. I am having a VERY hard time trying to set the Story Engine parameters in a way that makes sense to model these ideas.... Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

If you're making the argument that everyone (in a "big picture" sense) should be aware the consequences of their actions, then you should tie that to the OS Issue (be it Self Interest or something else).

If you're making the argument that the audience should be personally aware of the consequences of their own individual actions, then tie that to the MC Issue.

These are not mutually exclusive choices, but only one throughline can be tied to storyform variation of Self Interest. It's your choice. It might be good for you to look at other elements in the story to help you choose if the choice isn't obvious for you.