Niceday,
It's a pity the controller hadn't warned you about her intentions in case you had to go around, but you had the good reaction.
I doubt she forgot you. I reckon she suffered a symptom I call "post-trauma-stuck-synapses". There must be another terminology somewhere in Human Factors books.
172_driver,
The procedures you describe in US correspond to my former usual control sessions in tower, except I worked crossing runways and had to integrate idle-engine-landing-trainings (don't remember how they're called in English) and low altitude patterns.
I tend to call this go-around situation "risky". Not because planes were close one to each other (as you say, they were in sight), but because the controller let the pilots on their own, not making sure everyone had the "full image".
Controllers should control.
Perhaps they anticipated the landing aircraft would vacate quicker?
Yes, indeed. But it didn't.
So... what do we do now ?
PS : As to "separation" in the pattern, yes the controller must separate until visual. As soon as visual, pilots must know what to do. Otherwise, the service is called "information", not "control".