My impression is that Go and Lisp are similar here. Neither is particularly pleasant to read in the small. Lisp because of all of the parens and the sometimes "backwards" dataflow of nested functions. Go because of the "imperativeness", the frequent manual returns for errors, the mandatory {} for blocks.
In both cases, that was a deliberate choice in order to get simple syntax. The beauty they are focused on is larger-scale beautiful semantics. Lisp with macros, first-class functions, etc. Go with interfaces, goroutines, and channels.
Where some languages treat the syntax as a first-class feature, I think Go and Lisp treat it more as a means to an end. That being said, in both cases, practitioners of those languages do specifically like their syntaxes. It's just not a major focus of the language designers' time.