This question already has an answer here:
In a recent post (entitled 'Customer Requests (Sometimes) Drive Me Bonkers!'), I referred to myself as an artist, and made reference to the Renaissance. Among the many helpful responses I got, someone said something to the effect that I should only refer to myself as a 'designer' (or something like that), and presumably, not an artist.
The only problem is, I am an artist (in the traditional sense) and have been one much longer than a graphic designer. I work in several media, including oils, watercolor, pen & ink and pencil, and even sculpture. Graphic design (as I responded in the Comments) just seemed like a natural fit for me, but Adobe (and even PCs) didn't come along until several decades AFTER I'd been an artist for a long, long time. (I'm also a musician and a writer, and perhaps a 'bit' older than many of you might imagine. Because of this, I usually refer to myself as a 'content creator'.)
My question this time is: Don't graphic designers deserve to be called 'artists', too, even if they don't work in any of the traditional media, such as those I listed above? Isn't what they (we) do also a form of artwork?