As an "enlightenment" language, I've always found Haskell more interesting. The mathematical foundation has the effect of making it feel much more structured and sound, and the language has a surprising amount of elegance and beauty, thanks in part to the community's "Avoid $ Success At All Costs" motto.
I appreciate Lisp, but it's never really caught my interest the same way Haskell did. I like how it's basically the simplest kind of programming language you could have. Everything's just a bunch of lists, and the first element of each list is interpreted as a call. But the very free-form and highly dynamic nature of the language made it hard for me to tell what things were supposed to be or how they worked.
Another issue I had was that it kinda feels like you have to read lisp code backwards. Everything's essentially calls to functions or macros or things like that, and if the calls contain calls, then you have to look all the way into to read the inner calls, then start reading leftward to see the flow of the code. It's jarring and confusing to me when it nests deeply, and it's difficult to keep track of where you are in the code.
That being said if I had to pick a Lisp dialect, it'd be Racket, hands down. Racket feels like the logical conclusion of what Lisp is trying to be, and it's the Lisp dialect that got me the closest to finally understanding why Lisp is the way it is.