Why is it that all Frankenstein metaphors are poor? This one at least doesn't confuse the monster and the creator. In the story it's Frankenstein trying to destroy the monster, not the other way around.
In the spirit of productive discourse I'd suggest the sorcerers apprentice as a better comparison.
I'm not sure I've ever seen it adequately used as a metaphor that rose above the "Oooh, it's a monster!" level.
> He [the creature] traveled to Victor's [Frankenstein ] family estate using details from Victor's journal, murdered William, and framed Justine.
>Should Victor [Frankenstein] refuse his request, The Creature also threatens to kill Victor's remaining friends and loved ones and not stop until he completely ruins him.
> The Creature demands that Victor [Frankenstein] create a female companion....Fearing for his family, Victor reluctantly agrees.
> the Creature had strangled Clerval to death and left the corpse to be found where his creator had arrived
> The night following their [Victor [Frankenstein], Elizabeth] wedding, ... the Creature strangles Elizabeth to death
When the reanimated corpse of Wework starts murdering Softbanks friends and relatives, I will of course stand corrected.
Son's creation (Softbank) is doing plenty harm by investing vast amounts of money in businesses which "have no discernible path to profitability"