The Book

Modus operandi or not, Privilege was quite a one-off for Watkins in many ways — not least of all the fact that he made it under the dubious auspices of Universal Studios, no less! In addition, it was his first feature made for cinematic distribution, his first film made in 35mm (with its successor, Gladiatorerna, being his last to date), and, most significantly in regards to the matter at hand, it was the only film Watkins has made (and is likely to make) which was not based on his own original idea/screenplay or one which he created in collaboration with others and/or one based on historical events, and one for which he is, in regards to writing, credited solely with 'additional scenes and dialogue'.

From his own website: 'In 1966, following the collapse of a film which I hoped to develop with Albert Finney's production company, on the 1916 Easter uprising in Dublin, I was approached by John Heyman, a British artists' agent, to make a film based on an original screenplay by Johnny Speight, which dealt with the influence of Steven Shorter, a pop star in the 1960s. American novelist Norman Bognor and I adapted the script, which we retitled "Privilege", to emphasize the significance of Steven Shorter as an allegory for the manner in which national states, working via religion, the mass media, sports, Popular Culture, etc., divert a potential political challenge by young people.' (http://pwatkins.mnsi.net/privilege.htm)

(And it may be worth noting that Johnny Speight was, indeed, one and the same as the playwright and television writer who had created Alf Garnett only a year or two before creating Steven Shorter!)

So while you are correct, and the extant book (adapted by John Burke, according to the cover here: http://www.trashfiction.co.uk/privilege_cover.html — and potentially the same John Burke who conceived the idea for Michael Reeves's The Sorcerers, which also came out in 1967) does so happen to have been a 'tie-in'-style novelisation, it's worth emphasising that Norman Bognor and Watkins were themselves adapting from Speight's original (which, as far as I know, has sadly not been published in any form), which shows that Watkins was — if only for one, brief moment perhaps — clearly not entirely averse to the idea of working off a story not at all of his own conception, albeit still one that was clearly very closely in line with at least part of ethos and worldview.

—Marc-David Jacobs