Here's a question for those of you who are published writers. And those who are not, please weigh in with your opinion. Oops! Didn't mean to scare you off with that WEIGH IN part.
As you recall, due to me harping on it for two days, I was notified by e-mail on July 4 that Unsent Letters wants to publish one of my sent letters. After a day or two, I replied to the e-mail that, indeed, I would accept their offer.
Here's the question: Was that the right way to respond?
Should I have sent a separate e-mail, perhaps? One with publication offer and the name of my letter in the subject line? Or was the reply to the offer good enough?
The reason I'm asking is twofold. First of all, I'm not a patient person. I'm the Cup-O-Soup, not the slowly-simmered clam chowder. The Easy Mac, not the twice-baked macaroni and cheese. The Buddig turkey lunch meat on Wonder, not the thawed and roasted Thanksgiving bird baked to a delicate brown, sliced and layered on a made-from-scratch croissant.
Even though I know that the business of publication moves slower that a septuagenarian snail across a sea of molasses, I kind of sort of expected I might have heard something back. Even though it took eleven months from my submission to their offer. I don't want my reply to languish in a backlog of e-mail compost, fermenting, until it digests itself.
Secondly, I don't want to violate any unwritten protocols. Like engaging in sexual intercourse with the cleaning woman on the desk in my office, then gifting her with a cashmere sweater with a red dot. Or dropping off muffin stumps to the homeless shelter, thus drawing the ire of Rebecca DeMornay. Or mentioning that I did not get bread with my soup.
Sooo...is that frowned upon? To simply reply to the e-mail offer? Or is that the way it's done?
My inquiring mind wants to know.