I guess that sounds like kind of a downer (even though I said I liked experimentation and didn't want to make it sound like criticism of this particular impleme

I guess that sounds like kind of a downer (even though I said I liked experimentation and didn't want to make it sound like criticism of this particular implementation). I think there are definitely paths forward here, and my hunch (which you shouldn't listen to, because I don't know anything) is that the most promising one would be some combination of some/all of: - Not use Common Lisp as a base. Lisp is great, but reader macros and visualizations are a really tough combination. - Come up with a good visualization for quoting. If your fundamental units of computation are "symbol/word" and "box" (a neat concept to build a language around), then incorporate quoting into those things somehow. I don't have a good answer for you here, but I think this is the key to unlocking the whole thing. - Integrate with other tools (or upgrade them to this visual symbol/box world) that make good use of text today, like version control, sed/grep, or editor extensions (as in Emacs). If there was a programming environment that offered the same level of flexibility and power that I have today, but which was visual (and beautiful), I could see that being a very compelling upgrade. I'm fascinated by visual languages, and I find it unfortunate that they all seem to acquire visuals by sacrificing power.