Lisp syntax is just a nice format for textual representation of trees in general and ASTs in particular. Having done similar work in both Common Lisp and Go, I can confidently say that working with ASTs in CL is considerably less burdensome.
Lisp in general and Common Lisp in particular have a lot more going on than the syntax though. I think there's an old saw about syntax being the bikeshedding of the programming language world when it's semantics where all the real thought and expertise is required. It's the semantics that CL interesting, like for example its well defined notions of compile, load and eval time[1] and the ability to redefine existing types and functions, even while in the debugger.
Lisp in general and Common Lisp in particular have a lot more going on than the syntax though. I think there's an old saw about syntax being the bikeshedding of the programming language world when it's semantics where all the real thought and expertise is required. It's the semantics that CL interesting, like for example its well defined notions of compile, load and eval time[1] and the ability to redefine existing types and functions, even while in the debugger.
[1] http://clhs.lisp.se/Body/s_eval_w.htm