I actually did the ClojureScript tuts via LightTable, which was slightly less complex than the alternatives, but still required a bit of fussing.
(Incidentally, modifying my emacs setup in order to work on a project is the very definition of "incidental complexity".)
This is the kind of attitude that keeps people away from your language. The amount of people who shun away from C# simply because they don't like the idea of Windows / Visual Studio should be a hint.
I guess I did forget about Light Table (as AFAIK it doesn't support Scheme or Common Lisp yet), which seems like the right thing to point beginning Clojure programmers to.
Hell, that's probably a big part of why Clojure became more popular than the previous Lisps.
This is really not true any more. LightTable is great for beginners, and there are more options for Clojure now. I'm developing Cursive, which is becoming pretty popular - Vim also seems to work well, Counterclockwise is good too.
And it's unfounded. Thanks to Lisps unusually regular syntax adding support for semantic editing features (paredit-like) should be rather straightforward in any editor. And accidentally paredit is also enough to make coding any Lisp way more pleasant than editing raw code in other languages.
See http://emacsrocks.com/e14.html for an overview.
I'm actually kind of disappointed that in the demo I saw adding parens manualy, one at a time, instead of using wrap-sexp etc.