In the following sentence, from Hemigway's The Old Man & the Sea, I believe the author used the word benevolent when he meant to use the word benign.
The brown blotches of the benevolent skin cancer the sun brings from
its reflection on the tropic sea were on his cheeks.
Have you ever seen this discussed anywhere?
It would be difficult by any stretch of the imagination or poetry to believe the author purposely used benevolent in that sentence. Maybe he was drunk. 🙂
But it's also a bit difficult to believe his editor missed it. Of course, maybe the editor thought Papa purposely used the word and he didn't want to raise Papa's ire.
Here are some definitions of benevolent from merriam-webster.com
1 a :marked by or disposed to doing good – a benevolent donor
b :organized for the purpose of doing good — a benevolent society
2 :marked by or suggestive of goodwill — benevolent smiles
Has benevolent changed meaning since the book was first published (1952)?
Is it possible that benevolent was used, in 1952, in the same way that benign is used today?
Best Answer
It is certainly more common to refer to any tumour or abnormality that is non-cancerous or non-life-threatening as benign, but benign and benevolent do not have the same implication.
Benign implies that the thing being described is of no net detriment.
Benevolent implies that the thing being described is of net benefit.
Though Hemingway undoubtedly knew of the general use of benign, and of course the meanings of the two words, I would suggest that Hemingway was using artistic license in this context in expressing that the blotchy abnormalities in question actively protected the character from the sun's rays (though in reality skin cancer does not protect in this way, and not all changes in skin pigmentation are cancerous). As such they were not merely of no net detriment, but were, instead, of net benefit. Hence the use of the word benevolent.