I think the author misses the biggest reason why lisp never caught on: too many developers are simply aversive to s-expressions. Maybe Clojure, with its slightly richer syntax, will solve this.
I actually find the Clojure syntax harder to parse. Nested mixtures of }, ], and ) are very difficult to pick apart visually.
The rest is just icing on the cake.
S-expressions define a class of syntax styles. By themselves, they have no semantic characteristics at all. Macro's are a way in which the compiler rewrites the syntax tree based on user programs. Do you see the difference?
And nested ), ), and ) are easier to pick apart visually?
At least with }, ], and ) you know any given } matches a { and not a ( or a [. Whereas with all )'s, it's a lot harder (for me) to know which ( in a mountain of ('s it's going to match.
A good editor and proper indenting will, of course, mitigate some of the pain. But I'd MUCH rather have a mix of {'s, ['s, and ('s, than all ('s.
You don't have to pick them out in CL, just balance them. Much easier (IMO).
I have found the opposite. It's a lot easier to close with a bunch of )))s at the end of a line than to flip around with the )]}]))} line noise. I let my code's structure give me meaning. I am less concerned with matching things and more concerned with readable code arrangement. It is easier for me to read English-like words than a bunch of symbols. As a result, the ))s are almost equivalent whitespace with the exception that they provide useful and common structure.
The whole "nobody likes s-expressions" is as well-worn and pointless a cliche as "I miss Lisp boo hoo."