I see how the story of LOTR (I'm so glad to finally engage in a discussion about this on a metal forum!) can look like a celebration or affirmation of the resilience of the proles. But, let me suggest a different possibility.
The story is told (primarily) from Frodo's perspective because Tolkien was aware that his readers would find his background and disposition more identifiable than that of, say, Legolas or Boromir. The Men, Elves and Dwarves are heroic and daring, the way readers want to be but know they aren't. Readers can put themselves in perspective with the mighty heroes, and appreciate them more, because they have a narrative account (Frodo's) similar to their own from which to view the heroes and their deeds.
There is the fact that *only* Frodo had the fortitude to carry the Ring to the end, but not especially because of his own strength. It was more due to his lack of ambition to rule and control. This is illustrated early in the book where Frodo meets Tom Bombadil, who is powerful beyond Frodo's understanding, but is harmless (even helpful) to he and Sam. I think that expresses how Frodo (and Hobbits in general, maybe) are more willing to be servants to the percieved natural order of things, but only so far as nothing/no one is violating that percieved order. If/when that happens, the Hobbits are driven to acting heroically.