Shawyer dissertation May 2008 final version - The University of ...

ounced through the air above the crowd. The revelers passed around food, even offeringit to passers-by (Jezer, “YIP!” 8). Journalist Jezer noted that “within ten minutes after myarrival at Grand Central I knew everything would be all right, like the be-ins of theprevious spring. The police made no attempt to keep us out” (“YIP!” 8). Dozens of policeofficers stood back and observed the revelry without interference. The media snappedphotos, and scribbled in their notebooks. The Yip-In fulfilled the promise of a party, butalso the pledge of a do-your-own-thing participatory performance event.For Jezer and Lennox, the Yip-in started as playful be-in and a general good timefor all. Lennox fondly describes the scene: “Thousands upon thousands, from all overthey come to christen spring, the carnival is beautiful, fantastic . . . people having a goodtime” (2). Yet as the hippies celebrated, the anti-war activists began to chant, and themore militant radicals in the crowd eyed the watching police with animosity. Theyshouted slogans like “We want power” and “peace now,” and the UATW/MF memberschanted their namesake rallying cry (Lennox 2). Others practiced the snake dance, afavorite tactic of protesters trying to break police lines. Participants braced against eachother’s hips and shoulders, rhythmically moving forward in unison. The mood of thecrowd changed.But because the Yip-In was a do-your-own-thing event, the Yippie leaders hadlittle control over how the performance would play out. The invitation providedsuggestions for madcap behavior and the briefest of scenarios—the equinox celebrationat midnight and subsequent march to Central Park’s Sheep Meadow at dawn—butoutlined no limits on behavior. Abbie Hoffman argues in Revolution for the Hell of It that105