What does Garrick Ohlsson intend to say, in his explanation of Chopin's Piano Concerto #1 (op 11) as easier than #2 (op 21)?

Question

[Source:] Both of Chopin’s piano concerti have their merits, but
[1.] the Concerto in E minor is easier to take on:
[2.] ‘the F minor is more personal,
[3.] it is more difficult to understand the musical process; in terms of expression, this work is less brilliant.
The Concerto in E minor, obviously, is also [2.] very personal,
but the [4.] objective brilliance of this work does help.’

I unfortunately don't understand Mr Ohlsson's explanation; the bolded words appear too broad and vague to me.

For example: 1. Why is #1 easier? 2. What does it mean for #2 to be "more personal "than #1? I'm too confused by 3 and 4 even to divine their meanings.

Answer 1

If it helps, I can tell you that Ohlsson's statements don't mean a huge amount to someone with a full musical training and 50+ years of practical experience either! He's telling us something about his personal reaction to the two pieces. He feels (I think) that in one the "fireworks" are sufficient to maintain interest, in the less showy piece he has to work harder to reveal the musical content. He then contradicts himself to an extent on the "personal" issue.

Don't worry too much over "words about music". Enjoy the two pieces. Maybe look for emotion inside the more technical one, for effective (though less flashy) piano writing in the other.