Plant Correspondence Pro-Tip from an Old Witch

We've all heard (and even made) the complaint before that "generic plant correspondence charts that you find floating around online suck really bad" and this often extends even further into how books focusing on correspondences are also often very bad as well; that "not only do they not give you enough information", but "that information is often highly decontextualized and pulled from a variety of unsourced locations that make it impossible to properly recontextualize their use".

That complaint is (almost) entirely true (depending on the source). But where we tend to fail practitioners in this discussion, I think, is in always expecting people- especially newer practitioners- to just throw other peoples' pre-made correspondences in the trash entirely (even if they're historically founded) ... And then "make up their own" completely from scratch. Especially without truly giving them any kind of resources or knowledge of how to actually to do that.

What we miss, however, is that you don't have to just throw correspondence books in the trash. Not all of them are bad books full of completely unsourced and entirely decontextualized information ... You just don't need to collect 50 billion of them, however. You need to be selective about the ones you're using; some of them are very much better than others and will serve your needs better as a result. Just pick 1 or 2 good ones that you can easily understand, like the premise of, vibe with the content of, and can easily go back and reference as needed, to work from, in the tradition you want to practice, and call it good.

Personally, for my NeoWicca work in particular- which is the framework that the vast majority of my magic is performed within- I specifically work from two books:

• 'The Encyclopedia of Magical Herbs' by Scott Cunningham
• 'Elsevier’s Dictionary of Plant Lore' by D.C. Watts

I supplement these with additional sources only whenever these two sources don't include something I actively need or want to work with. In which case I usually look for localized lore (specifically Cherokee), or sources from one of the other three highly specialized / specific traditions that I work within (Jewish Mysticism & Medicine, Mormon Folk Healing, and Pennsylvanian Dutch Braucherei).

You don't have to use these books specifically- especially if NeoWicca isn't even the tradition you personally practice in the first place ... But you also don't need 50 billion poorly done charts or books, either; as the complaints tend to go: That is a really good way to wind up with a useless list that won't actually help you achieve anything truly significant in your practice.

However, nor do you actually need to expend significant time and energy scouring your local environment in order to figure out how you personally connect with it and can use it in your personal magic (especially if that's just not your jam to begin with. Because honestly no. Being real for a moment: It's not for everyone) ... Which is, frankly, something which often takes years of significant education and exploration to formulate a decent working list of; something that proponents of this option frequently (conveniently) leave out of the conversation entirely.

Sometimes working with a smaller and much more tightly defined set of pre-created correspondences early on is much easier, and makes for much more effective magic; whether that's a collection of 2 good books you really like the content of, or your own tightly defined and self created list of local correspondences, it doesn't actually matter ... But you do have options, and it is not "all or nothing" like people often make it out to be.