Abstract
Scholars depict punishment as a dialogue. However, in the context of a life sentence the question emerges whether a penal dialogue is feasible. This paper seeks to explore the responsive work of life-sentenced prisoners during their parole hearings. Drawing on qualitative analysis of sentencing remarks and parole board hearings in Israel, the paper theorizes how these life prisoners negotiate their strict, exclusionary and stigmatizing sentencing communication, on the one hand, and the possibility of re-integration and inclusion, on the other. As the findings suggest, the applicants responsively negotiate their flawed character, stigma and citizenship. The analysis reveals the intricate mechanism of penal dialogue in a case of a life sentence and sheds light upon the possibilities and limitations of communicative theory when considering the full meaning of the penal experience.
