Sometimes canon and historiographies can be problematic. This is when the reader, scholar, writer etc. take the canonic films as being superior to the ones not included in canon. In this essay I take a closer look on how the history usually is written about Alfred Hitchcock and his transmission from silent – to sound films. I compare the films which usually are functioning as examples to films that are usually ignored. I sort out the aspects which put The Lodger (1926) and Blackmail (1929) in canon, and apply these to The Ring (1927) and Number Seventeen (1932) which are not included in canon. This way I try to answer the question; is it possible to write this history in another way?