"drz" is unpronouncable in English, but probably closest to /j/ in "journalist", but with a /d/ in front of it (actually /dʐ/.) "y" is a slightly darker Schwa /ə/ (actually /ɨ/) and "ł" is the same as English /w/.
I'd render it in English as something like:
Also worth reading is the Wikipedia article on spite houses in General: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spite_house
Lots of cool examples of malicious compliance and plain disobedience.
That's what's so hard to pronounce for English native speakers, who have trouble with word initial consonant clusters (compare the English pronunciation of "Dvorak" as "Duhvorak.")
An added difficulty is that the fricative part here isn't alveolar as in either George or journalist, but retroflex (not /j/ but /ʐ/.)
My favorite Polish word in this regard is drzwi (door.) A word initial triple consonant cluster with an alveolar, retroflex and labio-dental sound, all voiced. Fun times.
There are three voiced sibilant affricates in Polish: d͡z, (alveolar) d͡ʐ, (retroflex) and d͡ʑ (palatal.)
The sound of rz and ż is indeed always a voiced (laminar) retroflex sibilant, but and here's the important distinction, following a consonant, ż forms an affricate (the middle one above) but rz does not; instead they remain as 2 separate phonemes (again, dialectal variations may apply.)
The other affricates are dz (alveolar) and dzi and dź respectively (palatal.)
I recommend the Polish phonology Wikipedia page, it seems to me to be relatively well sourced, though maybe a bit difficult to read for beginners: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_phonology#Consonants
EDIT: I think I wasn't clear: there is no difference between ż and rz, except when they follow a consonant. Then Xż is pronounced "in tandem" as an affricate, and Xrz is pronounced as two separate phonemes.
As a Pole too, I'd be against it. There may be no difference in pronunciation, but the spelling is still linked to the grammar and origin of the word.
Eg. while "każe" and "karze" may be pronounced the same, the spelling clearly implies that the former one is a form of "kazać", while the latter is conjugated "karać". It's neither arbitrary nor unnecessary - it's perfectly logical and it conveys actual information.
Eradicating the difference would obfuscate the underlying links and structure completely, and I'm not sure whether it would really make learning easier in the long run. Simplification for the sake of simplification is a lossful process.
*ch and h have historically been two different consonants but have gotten washed down into one.
Under communism Drzymała wouldn't be unlikely to get threatened, beaten up or even killed by "unknown perpetrators" (secret police).