I see what you are saying,
Dininziliel, and I agree with you as far as Frodo is concerned. He certainly displays Elvish qualities, and this is commented upon by other characters, such as Goldberry and Gandalf. But I disagree with regard to Sam and Bilbo. Sam certainly shows a wonder for the Elves and a desire to see them, but I don't think that he necessarily shows any Elvish qualities. As I see it, it is his practical Hobbit nature that enables him to endure the Quest and he is far more at home in the Shire than Rivendell or Lothlorien. Even his love of good songs and stories is, I think, rooted in his Hobbit nature. As for Bilbo, it was his "Tookish" side which took him off on adventure, rather than any Elvishness in him. And I think that it is the scholar/writer in him that makes him feel so at home in Rivendell. And that, I think, was sparked off by his adventure, rather than by his contact with the Elves.
And I am not sure that an Elvish nature would necessarily help in bearing the Ring. As I have said elsewhere, I think that Elves would have been rather vulnerable to the seductive nature of the Ring. Elves had enough flaws to give the Ring something to work on. Admittedly, the classic examples are in the First Age (Feanor and his sons, Thingol, Eol, Maeglin etc), but the Elves of later Ages clearly recognised their own vulnerability. The bearers of the Three immediately removed and concealed them when they perceived Sauron's plans so as not to be enslaved by him, and neither Elrond nor Galadriel trusted themselves to carry out the Quest of the Ring. Indeed, Galadriel's successful attempt to resist it is portrayed as a trial for her. No, I think that Hobbits, with their humble outlook and sturdy natures, were much better suited than Elves to bearing the Ring.
Which leaves the question of why Tolkien does portray Frodo as having these Elvish qualities, which become more apparent as the Quest unfolds. And that's something that I will have to think further about.
